"They will take your guns, and no, ... you are not going to do anything about it"

page: 5
19
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 04:47 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Right Wing nitwits and their popguns.

First, no one is coming for your silly guns if for no other reason they are no threat. But if they did, there would be absolutely nothing you could do about it. The military would have ZERO problem with "your cold ded hands".

Yeah, keep believing that your guns mean something.

No one really cares if you have them. Most people (even 65% of the NRA) just want some reasonable regulation is all.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
What part of "shall not be infringed" do some of you not understand?

Also the government doesn't give you rights, and in the case of gun ownership they cannot take away your inalienable right to protect yourself and your family from your government should your government turn against you.

It boils down to this:
Do you want to be a citizen, or do you want to be a subject?

There is a fine line between liberty and safety friends. Think about it. Which do you want?



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Bury a gun and ammo in the backyard if you can.
Seems to me that if they're rolling down the street I doubt they are going to get out and dig around in your property for weaponry.
I'd also bury a bunch more stuff, food, water, etc.
Make a 'cellar' of sorts that is inconspicuous.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   


The world does not want a disarmed American populous
reply to post by benrl
 


Jesus, America probably does not want a disarmed American populous. "The world", no.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
ATS is always good for a laugh and these gun crazy topics with the "Guvmunt wanna take muh guhns!" comments are the funniest.
Hilarious stuff fellers. I love reading some of your more "excitable" members comments about how the military are going to come trundling into town after town and engage in a shoot out with the man-of-the-house who upholds the "secon' amendmunt".

Obviously that's what your government does, right? They have regular shootouts with law abiding citizens just for the hell of it, happens all the time.
Who really is responsible for the killing of innocent people.
Were the government responsible for all those school murders?
Were the military killing all those people in the cinema?
Were the government or the military responsible for killing all those people over the years, just going about their everyday lives, in post offices, restaurants, places of worship, etc, etc?

Who does all the shooting? People with guns do the shooting, that's who.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by FeatherofMaat
 




Yeah, keep believing that your guns mean something.

No, we'll just end up with more and more terrorist activities like the Oklahoma City Bombing. Or Columbine, or Ruby Ridge. It's no longer about the guns; the guns are just the symbols. There is a great potential in the United States to become a terrost-state. The last town I lived in was organizing a militia, this was a couple years ago. I am curious to see how that has or has not developed.
edit on 18-8-2012 by Cosmic911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
This is where the discussion we had a few days ago comes in...The second amendment meant for us to be able to have the same firepower as the government/military. This is the only conclusion that can be drawn when you realize that the amendment was put in place to ensure that the government didn't become totalitarian and go against the will of the people. Well why have arms at all if they are ineffective towards that goal? I don't see how that argument can be countered, at least without completely trying to overturn the foundations of our country. But this appears to be what some are already trying to do. Saying we're in a different time, blah blah blah. Don't buy it, because today that amendment is even more meaningful than it was when instituted.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by The Ghost Who Walks
 


It's called, natural progression. And, it's the same drive that forces stock traders and corporatists to continue trying to improve their bottom line. Mediocrity goes against our nature. We must constantly strive to do better. To improve, enhance, increase...
When you apply this logic to those in positions of power, it makes perfect sense. In the view of the role of government, they can't be satisfied just existing. The only happiness they can muster, is in escalation.
What is, in your mind, the role of government?
Now, take those thoughts and apply them to what politicians are currently doing, in America. Do you see any of those things, being carried out?
Laws, rules and regulations do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reduce crime!
A criminal cares not, if there are a thousand laws, or a billion! Laws only affect the moral and law-abiding. So, if you enact more and more laws, you are ONLY performing subjugation. A form of enhancing power!
Now, have you ever heard of a law that tempers justice evenly, across the board, as well as across the aisle?
Yes, you know, the ones written a little over 200 years ago?
There was no partisan politics. They were debated, examined, abstractly applied, pondered and perhaps rewritten, but they all were for the GOOD of the common citizen.
Now, for the most part, the only time a law seems to affect everyone equally, is when we actually see bi-partisanship, and we all scratch our heads and dig a little deeper, to pay for something that no one outside of government or special interests, cares for or wants.

Anything that stands in the way of political agenda, is a threat to that agenda. And I've never...ever... seen a dog chained in the middle of a yard, that didn't have a nice circumferential groove formed, at the very end of it's tether...

edit on 8/18/2012 by GoOfYFoOt because: sp



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by FeatherofMaat
 



LOL your funny, but keep dreaming it would work like that.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Here's my theory on what could happen. If a SHTF scenario does occur, it may not go down the way most expect. Yes, military will be on patrol in the streets of america, but as a police type force. They would focus on the overt trouble makers and leave the average joe alone for the most part. Curfews would be established and those breaking curfew would be questioned and detained. Door to door searches would be unrealistic.

So, what would make us lay down our freedoms and guns? Not everyone are prepers and many have families and children to care for. Crime would be allowed to spiral out of control and things such as food and water would be strictly controlled. This will not be "sprint", per se, than a "marathon". Safe zones would be established, aka, fema camps. People will be scared and starving. So, many would voluntarilly enter the "safe zones" for food, water, and safety. The choice would be simple...expose your family to riots, looting, and gangs or seek safety in the fema camps. Many people would cave in after a couple of weeks and submit themselves to the military/government.

What would be the price for keeping your familiy safe from rape, killing, and murder? Control. You may be asked to exchange firearms for safety. You would live where told, rationed food, work details, and be tracked by biometerics. So, there would be no revolution, perhapes a resistance, many would prefer protection rather than gamble on the live of thier family and children.

What would you do? Would you face savage gangs and watch loved ones die, or turn in your weapons and cede your liberties. Of course, as history as a guide, one choice may be just as bad as the other. We would be betrayed by our fear. Our only out is God, as this exsistance passes by, but the kingdom of God is forever.

Prepare yourselves.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siberbat
Safe zones would be established, aka, fema camps. People will be scared and starving. So, many would voluntarilly enter the "safe zones" for food, water, and safety.


That doesn't explain why the razorwire atop the fences around these "camps" is angled inwards, instead of outwards. They are designed to keep people in, not keep them out.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
As OP said, makes you mad as hell.

This is after all one of our Bill of Rights.
To disarm the country will not be an easy task and most in the military and police force will not be happy to go along with it.

Look at all the gorilla wars we have been in, we loose more then we gain. To basicly attack US citizens....

I feel this will be a short event if it ever does come to pass.

I'll glady give up my ole broke 4-10, the rest they will have to find.......
If we loose the 2nd amendment, what will keep the Gov. from taking more. This is how Hiltler/Stalin, just to mention a few started.
With a population of no real threat, what stops them and thier like from doing what ever they choose.

He, that guy over there has a Hot little 16 year old girl... lets go pick her up.
What ya gonna do when that happens.../ Run and hide?
This list goes on and on.
edit on 18-8-2012 by DogMeat because: had nore to say ....



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Just keep some junk .22s and .410s laying around and bury all the good stuff. If and when they ever come, give the junk. I highly doubt they would outright take firearms, to convince enough military and law enforcement to disarm their own family and neighbors would be an insurmountable task. That being said,our best defense against such actions is the willingness to defend the rights we have been guaranteed. EyesWideShut said it pretty good earlier when he said " we either hang together or we hang separately."



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by DogMeat

To disarm the country will not be an easy task and most in the military and police force will not be happy to go along with it.



Not only would many officers/soldiers resist those orders, but also let's look at some fun gun facts from back in 2007 before Obama was elected and gun sales hit record highs:

The number of civilian-owned guns in the US at that time: 270,000,000

The civilian gun ownership rate per 100 citizens at that time: 88.8

SOURCE

And the numbers have only increased. These facts are the primary reasons there will be neither a sudden gun-grab by the US government nor an invasion of the US by a foreign entity.

The Founders got it right all those years ago, and anybody whom would argue against these facts are ignorant of both history, and the strength of the collective will of Americans when threatened with violence or the loss of fundamental liberties.

Yes, there are "gun nuts" out there, but they are an almost incalculably miniscule minority, compared to the millions upon millions of responsible gun owners.

-Mordeen



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 

What I am saying is that many people will choose the inward facing razor wire over basically gang controlled mobs/death squads. Many of which are looking for payback aginst society. I certainly would choose to find sanctuary with like minded individuals over either of the options.

What convinced me that this could happen the way I explained, was the breakdown in L&O in New Orleans during Katrina. I use that situation as a basis for my point. People CHOSE to go to the Super Dome, the dead littered the streets, lootings and killings, patients abandoned in LTC facilities. NOPD officers abandoned thier posts as they feared for thier lives. These were first hand accounts from people who were there.

Where were the "...from my cold dead hands" types during that situation? They were ordered by the National Guard and rescue workers to leave thier homes. They did what they were told. Now imagine this on a broader scale, with dozens of cities.

I guess we don't know what we will do until we are actually IN the scenario. It's one thing to say you wouldn't give up your guns or rights; it completely another thing when your faced with the monent of truth.

I see



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mordeen

Originally posted by DogMeat

To disarm the country will not be an easy task and most in the military and police force will not be happy to go along with it.



Not only would many officers/soldiers resist those orders, but also let's look at some fun gun facts from back in 2007 before Obama was elected and gun sales hit record highs:

The number of civilian-owned guns in the US at that time: 270,000,000

The civilian gun ownership rate per 100 citizens at that time: 88.8

SOURCE

And the numbers have only increased. These facts are the primary reasons there will be neither a sudden gun-grab by the US government nor an invasion of the US by a foreign entity.

The Founders got it right all those years ago, and anybody whom would argue against these facts are ignorant of both history, and the strength of the collective will of Americans when threatened with violence or the loss of fundamental liberties.

Yes, there are "gun nuts" out there, but they are an almost incalculably miniscule minority, compared to the millions upon millions of responsible gun owners.

-Mordeen

The assumption is that US troops would be used for the confiscation. Russian troops train all the time with ours near the army base I live. I do understand where you are coming from, however, soilders follow orders. Its what they're trained to do.

Of those 270 million gun owners, how many would be willing to place thier wives and children in a "last stand" type position?
The means may be there, however, I have to question if the will is there. I'm sure TPTB knows this.
Now I'm not anti-gun or anti-liberty, but we have to live in reality. It was a different time for our founding fathers. They were a gnat's hair away for total defeat. Do we seriously think people of this time would do any better?
The fact of the matter is, local government must be changed first, then anti-lobbyist law must be passed, finally limit terms to one term only. The system must change from the inside, and not from the barrol of a gun.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Siberbat
 


if it comes down to fight or fly, i will choose run.take my guns..
im no match for our war dogs. Marines
they love to fight
i know i will have my fun with sweet revenge,lol



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


all i can say is if we needs guns to hunt for our food then what? im not giving mine up witrhout a fight screw the government....



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Dreine
 


I think a mylar "space blanket" (the heat reflective emergency type) sewed into a black hooded poncho of sufficeint length might work. Theory being... your body heat would be reflected/blocked. Want to experiment but no access to FLIR





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join