Gun Control, Terrorism and the New American Revolution!!!

Buon giorno ATS! (I am not Italian...)

Anyway

According to US Federal Regulations terrorism is defined as follows:

The unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

(28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)

Keep that definition in mind please, especially when discussing gun control and for the duration of this thread.

To start with let me make my position clear, I am a British citizen and I disagree with some of the current American administrations evolving policy concerning gun control for several reasons.

That though is not what this thread is about, this thread is about the mounting calls for what amounts to acts of domestic terrorism against the citizens and the democratically elected government of the United States of America. The “Rambo Threads” as I now call them. Some “patriots” it would appear hold the second amendment in higher esteem than that of the first. This is about all of these threads calling for a new American Revolution, a Second American Civil war, 1776 commencing again or who just want to go shoot some people because they think that is going to get their argument across.

Most of these Rambo threads are not about the very serious issue of gun control and the erosion of rights they are about “Joe the gun-nut” making sure he can keep his constitutionally assured penis enlargement. It’s about him watching too many Rambo and Chuck Norris movies as a kid and has now developed this obscure conviction that he and his buddies are revolutionaries who will stand a chance up against a FBI HRT Team when they try to take over a government building or to the Secret Service when they try to assassinate a member of the government to make their point.

With their cries of “tyranny” their rhetoric echoes that of the worrying grandiloquence of Timothy McVeigh the Oklahoma City bomber rather than making a valid political point

Anyone who justifies such violence as a means coerce government is a terrorist in the eyes of the American government, people who advocate such acts may call themselves revolutionaries but in the eyes of the government they are terrorists and will be treated as such.

These people who are advocating terrorism as a means to influence or change government are not “patriots” they are lying to themselves when they say they’re “patriots”. There is nothing patriotic about taking up arms and advocating acts of terror against your fellow countrymen because you don’t agree with their views. Why is it that these people will happily flout the first amendment, advocating barbaric acts of violence against those who use their first amendment rights to voice their views? How can you call yourself a patriot when you don’t respect the first amendment? What is patriotic about resorting to terrorism?

The first amendment comes first for a reason, use it, why are there not more threads calling for marches outside the Whitehouse or for letters to be written and protest groups organised. Congress has not even voted yet on the big changes that Obama is seeking to bring about but despite this we already have these calls for violence, calls for terrorism.

I am starting to believe that before the year is out we are going to have an act of domestic terrorism committed in the United States of America, possibly even by a member of ATS.

"We the people" of America do not want civil war, what the few "Rambos" are trying to say is that we will fight for our freedoms, not just the second amendment, but the Constitution as a whole, if need be. "We the people" choose not to be "We the subjects" as you are. Our government is pushing the boundaries of what they should and should not do. They have no right to "infringe" upon the second amendment, they should not have started this debate in the first place, there is no debate, "shall not be infringed". The United States government has been pushing the limits with it's citizens for a while, this country is supposed to have a government "for the people, by the people", at this moment, we do not have this.The American government has acted treasonous many times over the past decade, if not longer, we have not acted upon this, enough is enough. As you are British and a subject, what do you know of these freedoms we as Americans have? Were you born with these? Have you exercised these freedoms since the day you were born? Are you in fear of losing them? Would you sit by and watch them be stripped from you, in any way? Just because you get on your knees and bow to another man, does not mean we ever will.

Our so called leaders already call many of us terrorists. Military veterans = terrorists, prepper = terrorists, hate the federal reserve = terrorists, Christians = terrorists, question 9/11 = terrorists, don't like the tsa fondling your wife or children = terrorists, etc.... the list goes on and on. Label me as you will, the only title I accept is "free man".

reply to post by sublik


You do know what civil war in the US would mean right?


no one watching the Lexus Store WooHoo

Okay seriously not gonna happen. why not, NRA AARP Most every VET I know. millions of us ready to stand up and say, Hey, wait a minute, not so fast buddy.

Remember too an executive order for the office of the president is not a law. That takes an act of congress Obama has no power to just say, go round up everyone's firearms. Hell if no one else will do then I'll take it to court on my own dime and I bet I get dozens of lawyers lined up do it pro bono for me too!

That though is not what this thread is about, this thread is about the mounting calls for what amounts to acts of domestic terrorism

No, this thread is about you ranting, throwing out personal attacks and insulting Americans and gun owners.

The “Rambo Threads” as I now call them

How many insults are in this thread? There's the first one

This is about all of these threads calling for a new American Revolution, a Second American Civil war, 1776 commencing again or who just want to go shoot some people because they think that is going to get their argument across.

Ridiculous and absurd. Nobody is calling for violence. Violence would be government forcibly taking guns from law abiding citizens. That amounts to acts of terrorism done by the government.

Most of these Rambo threads are not about the very serious issue of gun control and the erosion of rights they are about “Joe the gun-nut”

Another personal attack.

making sure he can keep his constitutionally assured penis enlargement

Gee, sounds like a personal problem for you?

It’s about him watching too many Rambo and Chuck Norris movies

Oh look, more meaningless drivel.

There is nothing patriotic about taking up arms and advocating acts of terror against your fellow countrymen because you don’t agree with their views

Nonsense. It's about taking up arms against those who are trying to forcibly remove our rights. Have you even read our founding documents? Maybe you should, seeing as you're a foreigner so content on constantly ripping our rights. I quote
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"

am starting to believe that before the year is out we are going to have an act of domestic terrorism committed in the United States of America, possibly even by a member of ATS.

My god, this thread is just melodramatic sensationalism used to personally attack American gun owners. It needs to be moved to Off Topic Rant forum.

reply to post by sublik


I don’t think you’re quite getting this.

I do not agree with many of the measures being proposed by Obama that is wrong and it is only right that the American people stand up for what they believe in.

That said however they should be using the first amendment to do this not the second, all these calls for violence are flat out wrong.

Also I find calling me a “British subject” disrespectful, I am a British Citizen no a subject

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I don’t think you’re quite getting this.

I do not agree with many of the measures being proposed by Obama that is wrong and it is only right that the American people stand up for what they believe in.

That said however they should be using the first amendment to do this not the second, all these calls for violence are flat out wrong.

Also I find calling me a “British subject” disrespectful, I am a British Citizen no a subject

Ok, I'll bite!

So let's see, you and I both agree that peacefully resolving the issue is the way to go about things, right?

Now with that out of the way, can you explain to me how in the world American citizens have a chance at resolving such issues when our own government has proven to be anything but peaceful?

I love how you try to use the Constitution as a tool for your propoganda, but you do realize that our founding fathers, (you know, the guys that rallied the troops to fight against your current masters) set this country up NOT to be attacking other countries in the name of globalization and central bank interests, but to only use FORCE, to protect our country??? I am sure that you and I can BOTH agree that the government of the US has greatly overstepped it's boundaries being the "NEW ARMY OF THE GLOBALIST CRUSADES" for a kinder, gentler NWO.........and also, with the aid of the global corporations and banks, have become master manipulators at brainwashing the masses to believe that all of THEIR killings are just and for a good cause???

How do you feel about this statement? "The biggest threat to any government, is peace!"?

After all, your OP is generalizing that those whom don't try to do things peacefully are terrorists....right?

Well, was MLK a terrorist? He was promoting peace and equality amongst people of different races and look what happened to him!! Assassinated!

Look at Malcolm X, didn't start out as such a great guy, but after realizing he was wrong, he also tried to bring peace to those of different races.....Assassinated!!!

Now let's reverse what I just said above and let's take a look at Al Sharpton. Not only does he promote racial violence, he is uplifted by our government as a representative of the plight of the black man! He even has his own segment of a news show on one of the progressive new channels!

Are you with me? Now my question to you is, "How is addressing a government in a peaceful manner to bring our grievences, a logical solution, when our government has proven in the past AND present to support divisiveness and unwarrented killings, in the name of achieving "THEIR" political goals?????

You act like you are in favor of a peaceful solution, while at the same time dismissing the FACTS, that peace is the LAST thing on the US governments agenda......

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I know what force is.

Somebody. Please visit my threads and videos. This is serious. Obama is a terrorist and
Taliban militant.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I don’t think you’re quite getting this.

Yup it's the people that live here that don't get it...we need outsiders to explain it to us...

If it takes violence to defend our rights...then so be it...
No one really wants that....but if it comes to that...wouldn't be the first time.....

Just look at how things turned out for ol king george, when he decided to mess with the firearms of us here

Force, gravity, lineage, latitude and longitude, as well as leverage; any of those terms
can be used to gear public sentiment or debate law.

Taliban's believe and know American's won't fight back now, and that's all there is to it.
And we can sit around having discussions about anything you want, but until
we arrest the administration we've been complaining about since I was born, we'll
live to see George Orwell's prophecies come true.

reply to post by okiecowboy


This thread is really quite simple, the message to take form it is that if any Americans resort to violance to make a political point they will be branded at terrorists.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

This thread is really quite simple, the message to take form it is that if any Americans resort to violance to make a political point they will be branded at terrorists.

Homeland Security has already made blanket statements that.........

Returning Veterans.....Terrorists
Those on the Right......Terrorists
Conspiracy Theorists...Terrorists
Anyone who questions the government (propoganda) Terrorists

Meanwhile, we watch the MSM on a daily basis tell us how bad Al Quada is and that all of our tyrannical safety mechanisms that we have to go thru, (flying, riding a bus, attending a sporting event, traveling on our highways etc etc.....) our to protect us from Al Quada!!!! YET!!!! Who is providing weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria??????
Yeppers!!!! The same same government who is telling us they are going to do their best to protect us from them, while giving the same said terrorists weapons!!!

Dude! It is quite obvious to me who you work for! You could give a damn about the safety of Americans! You just want to promote the globalist agenda!

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I don't believe any of you anymore. In 1937 you had your herb taxed, and in 1970 you had
it controlled. Now they're trying to control your guns and you're still sitting here calling
people like me a conspiracy theorist, on your conspiracy theory website. Fair enough
but this is a very valid argument with a lot of evidence.

Obama is most likely Osama Bin Laden and the President of Iran would support my claims.

Your local police authorities must take action. Now.

I urge everyone to share this image and my videos with their friends and family now:

reply to post by seeker1963


No the definition of terrorism relevant to the United States I have outlined above, it makes no mention of conspiracy theorists being terrorists.

If you want I have a thread on how terrorism is defined and another about Al-Qa’ida in Syria and how you are also wrong to say America is funding them.

I will provide links if you want.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

No the definition of terrorism relevant to the United States I have outlined above, it makes no mention of conspiracy theorists being terrorists.

If you want I have a thread on how terrorism is defined and another about Al-Qa’ida in Syria and how you are also wrong to say America is funding them.

I will provide links if you want.

Deflect much? I could care less what a dictionary defines as a terrorist!!!! What part of Homeland Security "DEFINES" do you NOT UNDERSTAND???????

I proved you wrong on Al Quada being supplied weapons in a previous post and I showed you the document from the CFR website! So play your propoganda game all you want, I am proving you wrong and all you have to say is, "the dictionary defines"?????

Get real! I was trying to be nice in a debating way, and you have to resort to deflections instead of logic trying to prove me wrong!!!

You may or may not be a government shill, but I am putting my life on it and saying you most certainly are on ATS to try to deflect the truth from any kind of arguement against the government of the US......

BTW, Don't think I didn't notice how you avoided answering my questions in my first post......

Hmmmm, kinda hard to deflect, when someone asks such questions I guess.....

Many gun haters here are growing very frustrated lately being on the losing side of gun discussions.

When they lack the facts to support their stance, they turn to silly rants like this thread.

And its almost always someone who is completely ignorant of America, and firearms.

reply to post by seeker1963


This thread is really quite simple according to US Federal regulations terrorism is defined as follows.

The unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

As such anyone who commits any act of violence as a means to highlight a political point such as an objection to changes in gun control laws is committing an act of terrorism.

In a nut shell that is all that really matters in this thread.

I proved you wrong on Al Quada being supplied weapons in a previous post and I showed you the document from the CFR website!

This point is entirely off topic if you wish to discuss it further then please feel free to do so on this thread that I have on the topic, I am not going to discuss it further.

I am proving you wrong and all you have to say is, "the dictionary defines"?????

First of all ,no you are not proving me wrong on anything as stated above if anyone commits a act of violence to make a political point regarding changes to gun regulation in America as far as the federal government is concerned they are committing an act of terrorism.

Secondly this is not a definition drawn from a dictionary this is the definition as set out under US federal regulations. I would never use a dictionary to define terrorism as I outline in this thread

I was trying to be nice in a debating way, and you have to resort to deflections instead of logic trying to prove me wrong!!!

I respect that you are trying to be nice about this but on the issue of me proving you wrong I really don’t see why I have to. It is very clear that under the US Federal regulations definition of terrorism that I have quoted above anyone who commits an act of violence to highlight opposition to the changes in gun laws will be treated as a terrorist.

You may or may not be a government shill, but I am putting my life on it and saying you most certainly are on ATS to try to deflect the truth from any kind of arguement against the government of the US......

To be very clear I am not a Shill nor have I ever been paid by any organisation or individual to publish anything on the internet. I would appreciate it you would stop casting such aspersions as they are lies.

BTW, Don't think I didn't notice how you avoided answering my questions in my first post......

If you have any specific questions that relate to the subject matter outlined in the opening post then please feel free to ask me and I will answer them as best as I can.

Also I would like you to remember this is not a “gun-grab” thread all I am doing is highlighting that there does appear to be a small minority of people on ATS and more noticeably elsewhere on the internet who are promoting the idea of violence to make a political point.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

If you have any specific questions that relate to the subject matter outlined in the opening post then please feel free to ask me and I will answer them as best as I can.

Everything I have questioned you on and related to your original post as well as those you have added are very relevant to the issues you are trying to use as targets to your ideologies!!!!!!

So deflect away my government shill! You have done a great job at trying to make my legitimate questions to your OP look like they don't matter and have nothing to do with your post, when in reality, your agenda has been brought full out in the open by my questioning!!!

First you used the dictionary to avoid answering my questions. Then you said, something that I had proven in the past that was inncorrect on your part and tried to say it has no bearing on your post, and now, on your last dieing breath as you try to keep your post alive, you are saying that everything I have said has nothing to do with your OP?????

I respect that you are trying to be nice about this but on the issue of me proving you wrong I really don’t see why I have to. It is very clear that under the US Federal regulations definition of terrorism that I have quoted above anyone who commits an act of violence to highlight opposition to the changes in gun laws will be treated as a terrorist.

Even though the Constitution says otherwise, I might add!

First of all ,no you are not proving me wrong on anything as stated above if anyone commits a act of violence to make a political point regarding changes to gun regulation in America as far as the federal government is concerned they are committing an act of terrorism.

Secondly this is not a definition drawn from a dictionary this is the definition as set out under US federal regulations. I would never use a dictionary to define terrorism as I outline in this thread

Hmmmm, did you or did you not refer to the definition of terrorist in the dictionary in one your previous posts? Now you are changing your tune???

Secondly, the States created the Federal government, and they absolutely have the power and authority to overide it, as long as 2/3 of the States agree!

Thirdly, it amazes me, that you (as many times as you say, are not an American) are consistently sticking up for the baseless and criminal actions, that the government is using to take over and dictate to other countries as to how they should and should not behave in the eyes of the elitests whom have used the banks to create these senseless wars!





YOU ARE TRUELY A COWARD!!

reply to post by seeker1963


Dude chill out and stop with the personal attacks, I am not and never have been a employee of the American government, I am not a shill and I most definitely am not a coward.

Also stop misrepresenting what I am saying, I have not ever used a dictionary definition of terrorism, so unless you can quote me directly doing so please stop with those lies also this thread has nothing to do with Syria or whatever you THINK you proved me wrong on however I will be more than willing to discuss those issues with you on a relevant thread.

Again if you have any question you want to ask pertinent to this thread then ask me.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Again if you have any question you want to ask pertinent to this thread then ask me.

As per my first reply to your post, you have conveniently deflected from answering any of those questions! You can say you don't work for the government all you want, but I can assure you by your words and support of the illegal activities of MY government, that you are not being honest.......