Gun Advocates Ready for Battle on Federal Assault Weapons Ban

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

If you're government doesnt give a crap about you in the first place and doesnt need you for anything and has lost all semblance of morality and your goal is to be rid of the damn thing then nonviolent protest will just end up in your death.

If this is the case, you are dead anyway. The government far out guns even the best armed civilian militia today.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Like the American Revolution could have been won with drum circles?
Like if all the Jews just went limp instead of marching into train cars the Holocaust would have never happened?

Again, in the days of the American revolution, the weapons gap between the revolutionaries and the government was very small. Even in the case of Nazi Germany, this gap was not too great to be overcome. Today, this gap is insurmountable with mere assault weapons.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Some people can be dealt with in nonviolent ways and others cant. There are a multitude of factors that can sway one method in a better favor than another but to come out and say "nonviolence is the answer" is frankly naive.

In light of the arms gap present today, I feel it is not naive to believe in a non violent resistance. In fact, I find to be a realistic, albeit hard to swallow, fact.

reply to post by BluegrassRevolutionary


As an individual who never claimed "war with government" as an excuse to own my rifles I suggest a better option would be to avoid all that crap anyway, violent or nonviolent.

Government seems plenty capable of destroying itself and America if more than large enough to live your entire life unnoticed.

Leave the BS protests and bloody battles to insane people trapped in urban areas.

I expect tax collectors and the like to be pretty busy if the situation should come to such a point and I'm not going to go out of my way to abandon my land and get shot in the face or arrested with flowers in my hair.

Originally posted by BluegrassRevolutionary

If this is the case, you are dead anyway. The government far out guns even the best armed civilian militia today.

With out the military how do they possibly 'out gun' tens of millions of armed American citizens????

reply to post by Anonymous Avatar


Simple, with foreign military units and the UN. There's already some agreement for mutual military aid between the USA and Canada if I'm not mistaken for domestic stuff. I'd imagine there's something between the USA and some European countries as well.

The Obama administration would be insane to try to impose a UN version of arms control upon this country. If they ever tried to impose such unconstitutional restrictions they would face the fight of their lives, and armed angry citizens prepared to back up Constitutional law with action and said arms.

Is Obama actually that stupid/insane?

Originally posted by spec_ops_wannabe
reply to post by Anonymous Avatar

 

Simple, with foreign military units and the UN. There's already some agreement for mutual military aid between the USA and Canada if I'm not mistaken for domestic stuff. I'd imagine there's something between the USA and some European countries as well.

I've seen things to that effect. However, at this point even if those governments sent troops here, I can't see the actual soldiers being too enthusiastic too fight and die for the US government. I could see them being here as more symbolic and trying to stay out of the heat as much as possible.

Originally posted by Anonymous Avatar

With out the military how do they possibly 'out gun' tens of millions of armed American citizens????

Who said they would not have the military?

Did I miss something?

reply to post by awake_awoke


what is it that you don't understand about guns keeping the government from taking all your rights?

banning guns is unconstitutional,and if you don't have them,you can't defend the constitution from the likes of the criminals in power now.

there is no debate. they want you to think there is so they can make laws that are illegal.

6 months after they take them,you'll be wishing,and KNOWING, that not fighting for that simple document we call the constitution,was the biggest mistake we could ever make.

the government is coming for everything you own...you gonna roll over and take it? if you do,you deserve it. end of story.

and clinton did not have this country on the fast track to demise as they do now.
when is everyone going to realize that this raping of our country is an agenda? every day its another screw job. it has to be planned,because these people ARE NOT STUPID...JUST CORRUPT

[edit on 18-3-2009 by Spectre0o0]

reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe


The Holt/Blairstone act Hr45-09 is in committee at this time although not taken serisously yet it shows what the future holds. It would ban all firearms that use a clip /simiautomatic weapons and gun owners would be amoung other requirements have to submit to psycological evaluation and fingerprinted and allow gun inspection for propper storage and containment. violations could go into years of confinement basically when done you might be able to own a shotgun or air rifle. contact your congressmens for mopre info. it is comming! just stall them while you reload I'm really ticked thatour basic rights are under such attack. In places like Australia they let the goverment take them away now crime rates have escolated upwards of 90%. Gun shows in Texas/Arizona and New Mexico are being blamed for influx of weapons to drug cartels in Mexico. Whats so stupid is with all their money they can purchase anything from gun dealers anywhere in the world. Stop the gun shows and maybe it would be a temporary inconvienance for the drug lords but they will only look elsewhere. Simple ecconomics are in play here demand mandates availability of supply the sad truth is america likes drugs so the demand will always drive the supply.

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I am not sure how much of a battle it is going to be if Congressional Democratic leadership is not going to back such an effort. I've included two recent articles of interest:




Reid joins Pelosi in opposing ban revival

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will join House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in opposing any effort to revive the 1994 assault-weapons ban, putting them on the opposite side of the Obama administration.

PELOSI IN SYNC WITH NRA?

That's right, Pelosi is using talking points which used to be standard NRA talking points regarding gun laws for years... "start with enforcing the law" on the books.

Oh lordy! my world just collapsed. ME and PELOSI standing on the same side of anything? say it ain't so....

nenothtu out

what is it that you don't understand about guns keeping the government from taking all your rights?

I am not really worried about the US government. I can make explosives and missiles for something like that.
I worked for years as a blaster so i do know how.
stimpy.cen.uiuc.edu...
www.intertlan.com...
www.pyronfo.com...

What i am worried about is the Mexican drug cartels taking over Mexico then crossing the border.

I know you think it would never happen, think again. They already have problems with the Mexican drug cartels in Phoenix AZ
How long before that spread to the rest of the US.

blogs.usatoday.com...

The officials say Phoenix now ranks second in the world in kidnappings for ransom, behind Mexico City. Most cases, they say, are tied to Mexican human smugglers and narcotics gangs

Do you really think the number of kidnappings in the phoenix AZ area would go down if every US citizen was disarmed.

If you do, I want to know what your smoking.

reply to post by ANNED


YOU BELIEVE that i dont think it will happen?????? i got news for you. i live in san antonio.i'm closer to the border than pheonix is.
i feel like i'm in a sandwich!!!!!!! lol


must see video

[edit on 19-3-2009 by Spectre0o0]

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
reply to post by orangetom1999

 

I never thought of the First ten amendments that way before. That you for putting it into that context.

TurkeyBurgers,

You are most certainly welcome. Glad to have been of assistance in opening your eyes to this bigger picture. Indeed that is precisely what the first Ten Amendments do..they are limits on Government so that we do not have a repeat of what the British Sovereigns were trying to do to the people here.

All attempts by government have been a slow erosion of these rights little by little until we are at the point of confusion where we are today. The First and Seccond Amendments have come under tremendous assault in the last 15 years.

Nonetheless I am gratified to see your eyes are open to a bigger picture. You are most certainly welcome..it gives me encouragement for the future that even one person gets the idea and understands.

When you are able and understand these things..then also when you are able... teach someone else as I have done with you here. It will pay dividends for us as Americans ..in the long run.
More of us Americans need to know these things. Our public education systems are failing us in this regard. This is not accidental that more of us do not know these things.

It is also the same thing with such nonsense arguments that people are using on this and other boards to show that people do not need what are called assault weapons.

This argument often falsely surrounds the concept that no such arms are needed for civilian use ..even in hunting or sport shooting.

The truth in the 2nd Amendment ..is that it says no such thing about hunting or sport shooting. This concept is not even addressed in the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Remember the 2nd Amendment is a restriction on Government. Government wants to use the phoney placebo argument about hunting and sport shooting to prevent people from owning arms..any type of arms. This is deliberate confusion and misdirection. It is politics...it is not within the 2nd Amendment.

Once you know and understand this phoney tack...you can see all these posts for what they are...politics. Oh..by the way ..in case you and others dont know..who pays for public education??...the body politic does. Getting the point yet??
They are not going to educate you to think for yourself.
Only to take a big bite out of the political apple...and also the phoney/placebo argument. They want us chasing the phoney/placebo argument which is not even addressed in the 2nd Amendment...they want us never catching on to the idea that it is a phoney misdirection argument so that we never notice what the 2nd Amendment really says.

Sorry ...long winded here...but it gets up my ire..when I see so many of these non arguments from posters here.

Thanks,
Orangetom

You're an idiot if you think that an armed populace can't beat the military in a conflict.

1) you're talking about 1 million soldiers, tens of thousands of which are over seas and unable to fight here. compared to tens of millions, if not hundred million citizens if armed would easily overcome the weapon advantage.

2) you're assuming that they would employ greater force and be able to convince military members to use greater force on their own people than they did or were willing to do to foreigners? and remember they have to have a populace to govern for it to be worth anything at all to even win. They;kk also be less likely to even use, say a 500 lb bomb because they will want to keep the infrastructure in tact.

No, the only way that WMD's will be used is if they actually WANT mass genocide, which is plausible, or if a foreign power with the capability uses them on us in order to take advantage of the disunity.

3) you're assuming that none of those superior weapons will be in control of those trying to take back their constitutional rights. That's the biggest joke of all. Many of our military are aware of the oath they took to protect the constitution from all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC and they will use their military might to do JUST THAT.

Hell, why do you think that the Chinese haven't invaded us with their 100 million man army with atleast a 50 to 1 advantage? because they know that the populace is the most well armed in the world.

The Japanese had even stated that they would have been fools in WWII to have attempted to invade because of how well armed the populace was.

Jaden


p.s. also, what do you think would give the populace better shot at possibly winning a conflict with the military? A semi auto AR 15/AK or a single shot manual feed bolt action??

besides, if you think that the civil war would be fought primarily with guns at all, then you haven't paid attenition to the IRA, afghanistan, iraq, basque, or practically any other modern revolution much then have you?



[edit on 19-3-2009 by Masterjaden]

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by BluegrassRevolutionary

 

As an individual who never claimed "war with government" as an excuse to own my rifles I suggest a better option would be to avoid all that crap anyway, violent or nonviolent.

Government seems plenty capable of destroying itself and America if more than large enough to live your entire life unnoticed.

Leave the BS protests and bloody battles to insane people trapped in urban areas.

I expect tax collectors and the like to be pretty busy if the situation should come to such a point and I'm not going to go out of my way to abandon my land and get shot in the face or arrested with flowers in my hair.

You sound like a man who may have read Dmitry Orlovs blog about collapses. cluborlov.blogspot.com... ml If you haven't read it you may find it of value. Rational thinking is going to be very useful in the coming years.

Originally posted by BluegrassRevolutionary


If this is the case, you are dead anyway. The government far out guns even the best armed civilian militia today.


Again, in the days of the American revolution, the weapons gap between the revolutionaries and the government was very small. Even in the case of Nazi Germany, this gap was not too great to be overcome. Today, this gap is insurmountable with mere assault weapons.


In light of the arms gap present today, I feel it is not naive to believe in a non violent resistance. In fact, I find to be a realistic, albeit hard to swallow, fact.

Depriving the citizenry of the right to keep and bear arms closes this gap - how? I think I must be missing something crucial here....

nenothtu out

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I am not sure how much of a battle it is going to be if Congressional Democratic leadership is not going to back such an effort. I've included two recent articles of interest:




Reid joins Pelosi in opposing ban revival

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will join House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in opposing any effort to revive the 1994 assault-weapons ban, putting them on the opposite side of the Obama administration.

PELOSI IN SYNC WITH NRA?

That's right, Pelosi is using talking points which used to be standard NRA talking points regarding gun laws for years... "start with enforcing the law" on the books.

Oh lordy! my world just collapsed. ME and PELOSI standing on the same side of anything? say it ain't so....

nenothtu out

Ha! that's funny that you quoted me but maybe there is hope for the democrats after all. The one guy from Virginia (webb) and the one guy from Montana(Jon Testor) for starters. Stuff is getting mixed up now and lets just say I know a girl who is a vegetarian and goes to the expos or workshops for that sort of thing. She is married to a cool dude that really likes guns. Maybe marginalized groups can come together around a common ground of being marginalized. I saw this in the 1990s when fishermen and environmentalists found common ground to clean up rivers and restore fishruns. Some of them may smell like patchouli but it copuld be worse. I'm getting down right optimistic.

reply to post by stikkinikki


You may have misapprehended me. I can't think of ANYTHING I've ever found common ground with Pelosi on - hence the sense of wonder. We might have different objectives here - I'm not out to snag votes - but it's still amazing to find her on my side of the table.

nenothtu out

Pelosi has the only concealed carry permit in San Francisco, however I was unable to find a solid reference on that.

I'm amused at gun shows when I see an AR-15 with another 20 pounds of accessories bolted on the thing - flashlights, handgrips everywhere, scope, flash suppressors, extra trim, laser pointers, video cameras, range finders, bottle openers, you name it. Actually that might be a good idea, you just can't carry it everywhere except maybe the range. Put it in a case on a dolly along with cases of ammo, spotting scope, targets and all the rest of it.

I'm more comfortable with long guns than pistols. It's easier to keep a long gun pointed down range, harder to conceal, and harder for it to walk away.

Here's an interesting story on a concealed carry holder stopping a massacre in a bar: m.rgj.com...

Winnemucca police statement on bar shootings
May 26, 2008 04:29 AM

Statement from the Winnemucca Police Department:

On Sunday May 25, 2008 at approximately 2:30 a.m. the Winnemucca Police Department was dispatched to the Players Bar and Grill located at 1062 South Grass Valley Road on the report of numerous shots fired and multiple gunshot victims. A combined law enforcement team consisting of Officers from the Winnemucca Police Department and Deputies from the Humboldt County Sheriff's Office responded to the dispatch call and secured the scene. There were approximately 300 patrons in and around the bar. No shots were fired by law enforcement during the incident. The officers on scene discovered three adult males who had died from obvious gunshot wounds. Two additional gunshot victims were also located. One of these victims, a 34 year old male, was transported to Humboldt General Hospital via private vehicle. The other victim, a 22 year old female, was transported via Humboldt County Ambulance. Both of these injured parties were treated and admitted to Humboldt General Hospital in "stable condition". Both victims have now been released from the hospital. The initial investigation indicated that there had been two separate shooters during the incident. One of the alleged shooters, Ernesto Fuentes Villagomez, age 30 of Winnemucca, was among the three men who were dead on arrival. The other was a 48 year old Reno man who was initially taken into custody at the scene as a person of interest. The subsequent investigation lead detectives to believe that Villagomez entered the bar and at some point began firing multiple rounds. At least two of these rounds struck and killed the other two decedents, Jose Torres age, 20 and his brother Margarito Torres, age 19 both of Winnemucca. At some point during this shooting spree Villagomez allegedly stopped and according to witnesses reloaded his high capacity handgun and began shooting again. It was at this point that the second shooter, the Reno resident, produced a concealed handgun and proceeded to fire upon Villagomez who succumbed to his wounds. The Reno resident was in possession of a valid Concealed Carry Permit issued through the Washoe County Sheriff's Office. After further investigation as well as ongoing discussions with Humboldt County District Attorney Russell Smith, the decision was made that the shooting of Villagomez by the Reno man was a justifiable homicide as outlined in Nevada Revised Statute 200.120 and 200.160. Because of this the Reno man was released from police custody. Although the shooting occurred during the Runnamucca event weekend there is no evidence linking the incident to any rival motorcycle gangs or clubs. Additionally, each of the decedents and victims were all Winnemucca residents. The investigation is currently pursuing a lead that indicates that this event may have been the result of a long standing feud between several families. There have been no further acts of violence reported in relation to this incident. The Winnemucca Police Department utilized the services of the Washoe County Crime Lab to assist with the processing of the crime scene. Additional support in the investigation was provided by the Humboldt County Sheriff's Office, the Department of Public Safety - Investigation and Highway Patrol Divisions, and the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office.

[edit on 19-3-2009 by Dbriefed]

Pfft. Yeah it's from Fox News (or faux news like some of you say).

reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe


on your politically correct senseless pan on Fox. Fox has made numerous mistakes, whatever your favorite ABC agency has made more. Fox is here it will be here permanently mainly because the ABC agencys have left a vacuum. They report liberal pro Obama news 24-7 nothing else. Very sweet, sappy, syrupy and boring!

Lately I check in on Fox to get the alternative viewpoint and usually they have something. Often I bring it to ATS and noone else has seen it. IE Fox reporters are finding interesting alternative stuff to report and your liberal sindications aren't even worth checking. There is soooo much interesting political, economic, scientific and on and on to report and the alphabet agencies are like the Obama news network.

And yes, Obama is out to get our guns, and the guns up in the cockpits too!

The best idea I ever heard was to give the pilots the guns and some training! But a good idea is never good enough for our incredibly smart, inspiring and genious president as apparently he wants our terrorist friends to not have to worry about armed opposition!

Pilots will no longer be armed. The program is unfunded. Isn't CHANGE a wonderful thing!

Now the American people can again be afraid of another 9-11 because of Obama. It is just a matter of when!

Cheney was right!