NY Mayor Warns Of "Waco-Style Standoff" Over Gun Control Laws

page: 10
133
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
When I read it, it sounded like a threat.
But after watching the video, I changed my mind.

I think what he's trying to say is not that every gun owner is crazy....but rather there are quite a few crazies who own guns.

Whether you agree with a mild form of gun control(and yes, everything proposed so far is rather mild, even if I'm opposed to it) or not, he's probably right about what he said.
edit on 18-1-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)


We were @ the Albany NY rally today and the Sherrif of Gloversville stated that he believed the law unconstitutional and wouldn't enforce such a law nor order his deputies to enforce it.




posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


If by that he meant that the government will use Bradleys to push the houses of any resisters off their foundations and then burn the people alive inside them, then that would be a true Waco-style "standoff." I didn't know trapping people inside their homes and opening fire on them for no reason was considered a standoff. Meh...maybe the definition has changed yet again. Gotta love the war on language. It's just like how they called the invasion of Iraq and the Stan wars. A war is when TWO armies are fighting.....so ya see.....not quite a war....
edit on 19/1/2013 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Revealation
 


That’s awesome!!

And the sheriff is well within his rights….so say the courts.


"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and `is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." [Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)]
Legal Ruling




edit on 19-1-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


So this clown is basically admitting that they want to violently seize guns from American citizens. Watch this, people, because he's simply saying out loud what all of the gun control people believe, and won't admit. If they do such a thing in NY, and get away with it, you know they will do it elsewhere.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
 


I don't understand the point of your post directed towards me.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:04 AM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 




No clue what you are talking about. He asked the crazy vs sane argument and I gave him a clear example that the argument is being used.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 





And you think a good chunk of the places that manufacture and or sell ammo, would be on the government's side in a civil war scenario? I highly doubt it.


They wouldn't have a choice even if they didn't want to be. The federal government can take over any private industry in the name of national security.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


You seem to have a serious problem comprehending logistics.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


The federal government does not have the man power to even control 50 states worth of private industry.

It all hinges on compliance. If they tried to seize anything in Texas for example, how many troops would they need to send to realistically do so? Then add to that 2 or 3 more states that choose not to comply?

You mean to tell me they have enough troops to fill 50 states AND enforce anything internationally?


Now who is being delusional Mr.Fed fanboy.


You believe the illusion of Superman in camo. I see people behind a curtain.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Waco, huh. That's a shot across the bow if I've ever heard one.

They've just told you exactly what they plan to do.

Janet Reno straight out had those people murdered, but the spin by the powers that be was such that most Americans thought they probably deserved it.

They'll put the spin on you too. They'll say you fired first. They'll say they found evidence of child abuse in your house. They'll say you were manufacturing drugs. Whatver they need to say.

They'll bring in the Army to enforce the law. Constitution ? Posse Comitatus? Those are just fancy brands of toliet paper to these people.

Get mentally and emotionally ready for it. Get ready for your "friends" and co-workers ratting you out and spreading false stories about you.

Get ready for the might of the US military to be directed against you.

That'll be your house on the evening news.

Most of all, get ready for the fact that most Americans won't care.
edit on 20-1-2013 by Snsoc because: clarity



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Snsoc
 





Most of all, get ready for the fact that most Americans won't care.


I dont know bud. We have come along way from the days of Waco.

To be honest, I would not trust the pulse taken and offered by think tanks and federal agencies.

The US is not the over weight and scared country it was in the 90´s. Most people I know would not be the Cheetos honey boo boo couch potatoes type....

They would die for me and I for them. I know of plenty of people that would not just sit by and watch them kill me. We would not let our city turn into a one sided battle ground. We dont "know" each other personally, but we are like that. Cops too.....AND I am from NY...Imagine in other places....

edit on 20-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3
 



I've been asking this question: How many Americans is Obama willing to murder in an attempt to disarm the population? I think as soon as we know that answer, we'll know how far they're willing to take this.


I think the answer is – as many as it takes.

The question I’ve been asking is “How many Americans is Obama going to have to kill before the rest of the country realizes what WE already know?”

How much more freedom will be stripped before everyone gets a clue? And will it be too late to do anything?


As much as they can strip until more of the masses open they're eyes and really see what is and could happen. Its kinda like when Neo started to believe in the Matrix. Then he saw the world he REALLY lived in. What was behind the curtain. Thats the awakening that needs to happen. The only thing you can do is Hope that it doesnt get to the point to where its too late. As for me....i stand my ground! My eyes are open....i am awake.
"Shall Not Be Infringed"



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
So basically, you need your guns to stop people from taking your guns?

right....



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by zedVSzardoz
 




The federal government does not have the man power to even control 50 states worth of private industry.


If you think gun corps are going to hand over guns and bullets to you for FREE to some rebels then you're delusional. Profit is their one and only motive.

I'm sure Monasanto would hand over tons of GMO tomatoes for you to eat for free too.



It all hinges on compliance. If they tried to seize anything in Texas for example, how many troops would they need to send to realistically do so? Then add to that 2 or 3 more states that choose not to comply?


Yeah....because Americans in this day and age are going to line up to start a war
You'd have a few fringe militias starting problems, not whole state populations.

State governments are corrupt and dependent on federal government funding. Again, if you really think they're ever going to be on your side.... then you're gullible. Sorry. Get a clue.



You mean to tell me they have enough troops to fill 50 states AND enforce anything internationally?


You're in some delusion that millions of Americans in every state would actually go join an army to fight the fed


The only people in this age that are that mad are right wing extremists. They're a tiny minority of the USA population. So....good luck.



Now who is being delusional Mr.Fed fanboy.


lol....

I'm a fed fanboy because I burst your optimistic fantasy? Sorry that you guys have a kindergartener mentality of if someone disagrees with you then they must like what they are disagreeing with.

I'm bored of arguing this. Go and rebel, get martial law declared, freedom stripped further and Americans slaughtered. Anyone that would do this is just stepping into their mouse trap...but again, logic escapes most of the right wing fringe.*shrugs*



edit on 20-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


I understand it is beyond you to imagine people doing anything that is uncomfortable or difficult. But you are so delusional I cant help but to break your fed fan boy bubble.

If the world was as you assume it is, your country was as you insult it to be, and the federal government was as all powerful as you pleasure yourself to it by, THEN

1. No one would fight anymore since there ARE more powerful people everywhere and always, hence the world would be living in perfect peace by one group or people already establishing their power once.

2. The US would never have rebelled and won its independence (or anyone else for that matter, EVER), nor would the US have the strongest military in the world and brightest minds in almost every industry. Who makes up the US armed forces? Fit and healthy Europeans? Or the supposedly fat and scared Americans you insult? Who innovates and designs the weapons and technology FOR the government? Red Chinese on lease or the "dumb Americans." How many MILLIONS of dollars do average American families donate to an almost infinite number of causes a year? And you say they would not help their own people?

3. the federal government would just do as it pleases and not have to spend BILLIONS of dollars in a decade on propaganda and information control. If they had nothing to fear from the people they would dictate., not try to convince.



edit on 20-1-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


A disarmed people, will make it impossible for these bullet manufacturers to make any money..... So giving out ammo for free for a while, so they can have the possibility of making money again in the future, or fall in line with the goobermint, which would effectively kill their chances of making money ever again, and destroy their business. Which do you think they would choose?



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Briles1207
So basically, you need your guns to stop people from taking your guns?

right....


Basically, you need your guns to stop some tyrannical government from taking your property, your rights, your life. That's the point.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle

The federal government would monitor all roads for suspicious activity and shut off water and electricity to any suspected "terrorist" hide out areas. Anyone caught collaborating or helping the "terrorists" would be charged with treason and executed. This would fear most people into submission.


The guerrillas certainly hope so. there is no more effective recruitment tool for a guerrilla force than harsh government reprisals.



Good luck.


Likewise. See ya in the field.

Unless you see me first.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by FeatherofMaat
Meh. A drone and a tank will take care of that idiocy.


You sound like someone who WANTS a war. There may be something broken in your head - you should have that checked. To be fair, however, I've heard a lot of left-wingers calling violence of that sort on citizens they disagree with. Send in the drones. Send in the tanks.

Yeah. Send 'em in. See how that goes. I can guarantee you there are places in America where if they go in, they will never come back out of. That blood will be on YOUR hands for inciting attacks upon your fellow Americans.

I cannot understand the mindset that worships technology and machinery, as if these objects were possessed of some sort of deity and are omnipotent and unstoppable. I REALLY can't understand the mindset that insists on attacks against the people who are producing your grain for flour, bread, etc, the people who supply your milk, the people who make sure you have meat for supper. You know almost all of those folks are the "armed insurgents" you are inciting violence against, right?

Slaughter and clean your own chickens. The people who do that for you now are going to be pretty busy if you have your way.

If the war you want ever hits here, there will be more Americans dying of starvation than from bullets. 80% of our population lives in cities. They get 100% of their food from elsewhere... from the same people you are aching to kill. What happens when it's YOUR mother that is "collateral damage"? What happens when it's YOUR city that can't be fed any more? You gonna eat your neighbor?




edit on 2013/1/21 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   
so, the government is going to trap a bunch of families and children in a building, kill several officers/agents who know too much about other corrupt cases and then set the place on fire burning everyone alive?


wow





new topics
top topics
 
133
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join