So the dreaded day arrives and they are coming for your guns

They aren't coming for your guns, they are coming for you. Here is how it will go. Massive planned disruptions of power, fuel and water. Planned shortages to make people very uncomfortable, but not desperate; uncomfortable people will do things to make themselves comfortable again, while desperate people will form gangs and rebel..

In the beginning, if you have a guns you can trade them in for ration credits (for a short time say 6 months or so).. Then it becomes, if you know someone who is part of the "resistance" or anyone who has guns, gold, illegal drugs, food caches, independant water sources, gardens, or anything of value and we'll give you a double ration of food, water or fuel if you tell us where they are. They then come, assess the threat and act accordingly, if you are armed they will just poison your water supply or garden and search your place 3 days later. This tactic worked well in Hitler's Germany, and is quite popular currently in China.

I suggest you put as much knowledge in your brain as possible before the (s)election and try fasting for a week, see if you can do it. You will realize you can make it the rest of the way with relitively little discomfort beyond day 3. Going without water is another matter however.

I find the conspiracy theorists to be incredibly inconstant, on this issue.

So let me get this straight....

Less government = more freedom

Less taxes = more money

Less immigration = more jobs

Less regulation = more environmental protection

And yet...

More guns = less crime

Less = more, unless it doesn't fit our ideology.

Next.

Good morning all.
I am not sure if you all understood the real point of my OP and where I was trying to lead you. What I was trying to get you to take away from it is that we have no plan in place if the day comes. My real concern is not guns,
What does concern me is that we have people like John Kerry in office trying to give our sovereignty to the UN. This time it was our waterways and letting the UN be in control of them. We also had a UN summit on gun control.

The mere fact that we participated in this type of conversation with the UN is enough reason to be alarmed and to act preemptively. To sit idle and wait for things to deteriorate to a certain point before taking action is a bad idea.
I would feel a lot better if states had laws in place that stated certain actions will lead to certain consequences. I would feel a lot more at ease if I knew the guy that was sent to the UN on our behalf had his hands tide by the states having laws in place that told them they can make any kind of deals they want but make the wrong deal and the Fed will lose more than it gains.
Our parents failed us big time, some of you failed us big time, We had the opportunity to put the Fed in a cage and chose not to. Ever since then things have gotten steadily worse.
Check my next thread to see my opinion how seat belts destroyed America

Originally posted by randomname
american society is so splintered that any organized resistance is impossible.

in america, the only thing that there is more of than guns, are opinions.

Ya know, America is like the Griswolds at Christmas......even though we are different and fight amongst ourselves. When need be we come together with finesse and fury. So this statement is not entirely accurate.

reply to post by glasshouse


Exactly! That is why they limited the central govt to only raising and suporting an army to two years. It was also why they gave the power to form militias to the states. Checks and balances. If the central govt became tyrannical, the states could overthrow, if a state got tyrannical, then the central govt could call up an army (from the other states) and defeat them. Sounds a lot like the civil war.

The southern states called up thier militias to defeat a tyrannical central govt. the central govt called upon state militias to defeat the insurrection by the southern states. Very Constitutional.

the second amendment and the constitution are all ready been taken apart.
bit by bit and You are leting them do it!
I wish we had what you Had...

Originally posted by Nyteskye


And yet...

More guns = less crime

Less = more, unless it doesn't fit our ideology.

I see where you are coming from. Your logic is intentionally misleading, but I think you know that already.
More guns in the hands of law abiding citizens does nothing to reduce the amount of crimes. This I will not and can not argue, for it is true.
What it does do is reduces the number of successfully committed crimes.
A few weeks ago 2 hoodlums went in to a business in Florida to commit robbery. The crime was committed, they went in and held the place up, The gentleman with the firearm did not prevent the crime from taking place, To even insinuate that people carrying a gun stops a crime from ever taking place is without merit.
When the elderly gentleman pulled out his firearm and shot the 2 criminals, he prevented the success of the robbery and removed the possibility of these criminals further violating the rights of everyone in the building.
You see, it is not the fact that he prevented the success of a robbery that makes him a hero, it is that he stopped the violation of our Bill of Rights.

Next.

reply to post by ronnieray123


You are very delusional. When they come for the guns they will not ask, they will demand I imagine that it will be about the same situation as when guns were outlawed in England in 97 (or 98?)... gun owners will be given a date and time, say Dec 31st midnight to turn their guns into a turn-in center or a police station. After that they are illegal. I think that is the most probable theory, because the government does not have the resources to commit to a door to door round up. Having said all of that, there are about 80 million - 100 million gun owners in America, and there are roughly 500 million private firearms out there. There will be a fair amount of gun owners that peacefuly comply and turn them in. There will be others that hide what they have, hoping that the law is overturned in the near future. But then there will be the gun owners that revolt, and it will be MILLIONS of people. The government doesn't have the resources to combat that type of revolt, even if they employ all local, state and federal law enforcement AND military, they will be vastly outnumbered. The advantage the government has is that they are organized, and the vast majority of gun owners are not, save for the lunatic fringe groups that think they are militia members. Do not confuse that last statement with the organized, active militia groups out there that respect natural law and the constitutionality of the militia as a state defense against federal tyranny.

Moral of the story is... when the time comes, and the line is drawn in the sand, sides will be decided at that point in time. The military and law enforcement individuals that disagree with the order will probably defect, and those that do not will have choosen there fate. Anyone that is attempting to obey the unconstitutional law will be considered a domestic enemy of the constitution and will be dealt with accordingly. The situation I have described here is nothing more than a critical thinking approach to determine the most probable outcome of guns being outlawed, and the attempted confiscation that will follow. I am in no way threatening violence against anyone, nor am I condoning violence against anyone. My gut tells me that our elected officials, as well as most law enforcement know the consequences of attempting to confiscate guns from the American public, but I fear that the arrogance of the political elite will blind them from this truth. America is the last domino that needs to fall in order for the NWO agenda to be realized, and the only thing stopping that is an informed and well armed American citizenry. We can talk about this all day, but the bottom line is that it is in God's hands, and for the believers out there, we know why all of this is happening, we know where it is going, and we know how it all ends. Evil will lose, and those that have made the concious choice to support this tyrannical evil for whatever reason will meet their doom by the hand of God. I am not a religious zealot. I am not a Christian fundementalist, but I do have a strong belief in God and I know that in the absence of God, evil thrives... and this world turned its back on God along time ago.

Originally posted by ronnieray123
reply to post by Sulie

 

Just where exactly are you gonna buy bullets from if there are no more legal guns? Walmarts? come on you guys think through the topic thoroughly, know your enemy better than that.

Our power is in enacting laws that say cross this line and we are outta here, The federal Branch cant live without ALL the tax dollars...we can win but not with bullets,

edit on 1-8-2012 by ronnieray123 because: (no reason given)

This is why I have an extensive collection of brass. I buy it at yard sales, etc.....There are instructions out there on how to make your own bullets. Just 'sayin!

The reality is quite different. They will come to your house and you will give them your guns willingly, or you will perish. You might get a dumb idea and shoot one of them, or you might get lucky and end up in prison instead of dead.

Nah, man, I don't have any guns.

As for the goofballs that are tasked with "rounding up weapons", well give them what they want. Take some realistic airsoft weapons, set them up somewhere where they will be noticed and not linked back to you, like in this video. Pretty soon there will be a shortage idiots who think it's their solemn duty to confiscate arms.
www.youtube.com...

Its always funny how we in the uk get seen as having every criminal packing a weapon as if to prove a point, now i've known a lot of low lifes/druggies/burgulars etc and you mention a gun and they all say no thanks due to the possible risks...mug an old lady and get caught you probably get a couple of months tops but be caught with a weapon its 5 years min probably heading nearer 10 and you'll be in a rougher prison with less chance of parole etc so for most career criminals its not worth it to even go near a water pistol with hello kitty labelling

but as for the american's having more weapons....i think its a great idea they want it and its part of the law so give em the right to own nukes/biological weapons/30,000 rounds a minute machine guns or whatever just so long as they keep it on their own soil

Well, if it is the blue hats, I might have a few options.

I could shoot on site, after all, a foreign armed soldier on my soil is an act of war and I could respond as such.

Of course I could try and catch me a POW.

Just wondering, I intend to uphold the oath I took, but would I also be held accountable to follow the Geneva Convention? While I do agree with it, in this case, I am not so sure I would be inclined to follow the directives of it.

If and when they come to your house you will lose. You might win if it is two police officers on a domestic violence charge and then there will be an APB issued for your arrest but if it is paramilitary collection of guns and/or round up of gun owners and they come to your house you will lose. First there will probably be an APC with a squad of men and a police car sent to each house. There might even be a designated sniper taking up a position nearby and another staying back to man the radio in the event they need to call for back up. Once there is resistance by you and back up is called then it could even escalate to a Waco type siege but you will still lose (likely burned out if you dont surrender after utilities are shut off). I saw an AH Mk1 attack helicopter with missile pods flying above the street yesterday. Do you really think that you could survive an assault by that? Citizens have the police and military outmanned by general numbers but if they are coming for you and/or your guns they will have the numbers at "the decisive point" (in addition to the element of surprise and tactically trained men who will shoot and kill you). Have a nice day.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


I am going to take at least one of them with me then.

reply to post by Skewed

After the skirmish at Lexington and Concord the colonial rebels did not wait for the redcoats to go door to door.

reply to post by randomname


Nice insult, I am sure we have saved your arse no matter where you residing and allowed to speak your native tongue. I would rather live here and might I add I have travelled the world then most anyplace on earth.

Only an idiot would die for a tool..

Then again all your going to get is internet Rambo's doing some online strutting and such...saying..I will take one or more out...blah blah...all who have this romantic version of the outcome.

Truth is..most if not all of them would be wetting themselves or even better handing their weapons over without no fuss.

These same morons also say that the American gun owners would give them a hard time if they ever came for them...not even realizing that these same idiots would be scattered throughout the country and would pose no threat for any well armed and trained military. A few tanks...a few jets dropping bombs..and it would be over in a matter of hours or hell even minutes.

But hey ...keep your fantasies if it helps you sleep at night. I know and so do others who live in reality know what the outcome will be...annihilation...

Originally posted by Feltrick
In reading the US Constitution and 2nd Amendment it seems the framers were looking at the Right to Bear Arms as more for maintaining MIlitias.

Section 8 reads: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; and

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; and

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

So, they relied more on MIlitias for the defense of the country.

Now, the 2nd Amendment reads: 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.

Tells me that the framers of the Constitution, in order to ensure we had a well regulated militia and a ready populace, wanted to ensure that the people had weapons. Instead of a small army being fed and supported by the government, the entire populace could be mobilized at any given time to defend the Nation.

As for the Government coming for our guns...I don't buy into the hype. Gun sales seem to go up when there is talk of restricting the 2nd Amendment. Perhaps the real conspiracy is with gun manufacturers who tell us are rights are being violated to boost sales.

The intent of the militia was that the people be the militia an dthe militia be the people. The intent was that every free man be armed because the RTKBA is the mark of the freeman. I suggest you read Hamilton's the Federalist #29. LINK

When they come I'll give up my guns...and when they leave I will make more. You know the song, "Country boy can survive"...Hank Williams JR. I love that song.

Originally posted by ronnieray123
reply to post by Sulie

 

Just where exactly are you gonna buy bullets from if there are no more legal guns? Walmarts? come on you guys think through the topic thoroughly, know your enemy better than that.

Our power is in enacting laws that say cross this line and we are outta here, The federal Branch cant live without ALL the tax dollars...we can win but not with bullets,

edit on 1-8-2012 by ronnieray123 because: (no reason given)

Black market. Plenty of people also make their own bullets.