- Joined
- Oct 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,682
- Reaction score
- 1,905
- Location
- Lost at sea~
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
When you consider the fact that the police officers would be acting in violation of the Constitution and the sacred oath they swore to uphold and defend it, they would nolonger be enforcers of law, but armed perpetraters in the commission of a crime__ie; criminals.Are the people claiming they would shoot police officers who would enforce a gun ban Ron Paul supporters?
The courage people have behind anonymous IDs on forums is impressive.
Now there's a deliciously "slightly liberal" response. Thank you, molten_dragon.I try any legal means available to me to get the ban repealed, but that would be the end of it. I don't care enough about the matter to rebel against the government over it.
No we don't__the car got crashed and teds dead.(no biggie, I didn't like that car much anyway)Who needs guns to take people out when we have Teddy Kennedy's car?
Most liberals are more concerned about the matrimonial rights of homosexuals than the constitutional rights of all.Now there's a deliciously "slightly liberal" response. Thank you, molten_dragon.
I imagine a straight "liberal" person would do the same as you, but go one step further and try to talk conservatives into giving up as well. I suspect the "very liberal" group would also try and talk conservatives out of opposition, or just resort to violence to help preserve government control.
Everyone always speaks big on this issue but they have been restricting it when they have no authority to do so for decades and which one of them did anything about it? A big fat none. I can't just say I will revolt because no one will ****ing join me! It will be a party of one getting shot in the street.
And the 11 oclock news will report; "a crazed right-wing radical extremist was killed today by police officers whose lives he was threatening for attempting to perform their lawful duties while bystanders cowered in fear for their safety"Everyone always speaks big on this issue but they have been restricting it when they have no authority to do so for decades and which one of them did anything about it? A big fat none. I can't just say I will revolt because no one will ****ing join me! It will be a party of one getting shot in the street.
Are the people claiming they would shoot police officers who would enforce a gun ban Ron Paul supporters?
The courage people have behind anonymous IDs on forums is impressive.
There was an example in another thread about a sheriff that said in a press conference he wanted all guns banned and retroactively collected. The beat officers all pretty much said something along the lines of "let him go get his own ass shot off if he wants them that bad, we won't do it".Considering the fact police are an arm of the government they are a legitimate target just as much as those running the country are should the government become tyrannical.Because those who make and write the laws are going to be using law enforcement and military to help enforce it's tyranny,therefore that makes them legitimate targets should those in law enforcement and military decided to stay and enforce the government's tyranny.
Sadly, this is probably the most honest post in the entire thread.
There is no need to repeal the second amendment, when it can just be whittled down, watered down, and deformed just a little bit at a time, until it is, in essence, meaningless. It's te same way most societal strengths are degraded over time.
Good point. There is a breaking point in either direction for all of us, some people will break towards the fighting side and some will just break down. That's evident enough when you see the bullied person fight the big dog, or when you see the tough guy in a corner crying because he's just had enough. The honest answer is most of us don't have any factors to go on other than SHTF in this hypothetical but there are other things to consider like "is it rebellion or suicide based on the options", "who are the targets and what are their protections", "how good are communications", etc.I think many of you would be surprised what people will do when pushed.
The 1 time I was pushed to that point, Illinois has a misdemeanor assault to plea down to from felony aggravated assault.
People will fight and shoot to defend those rights. I was fortunate in that all I lost was my favorite AK. If pressed like that again, I would do the same.
No internet bravado here. I imagine I am not the only one.
Considering the fact police are an arm of the government they are a legitimate target just as much as those running the country are should the government become tyrannical.Because those who make and write the laws are going to be using law enforcement and military to help enforce it's tyranny,therefore that makes them legitimate targets should those in law enforcement and military decided to stay and enforce the government's tyranny.
I think many of you would be surprised what people will do when pushed.
The 1 time I was pushed to that point, Illinois has a misdemeanor assault to plea down to from felony aggravated assault.
People will fight and shoot to defend those rights. I was fortunate in that all I lost was my favorite AK. If pressed like that again, I would do the same.
No internet bravado here. I imagine I am not the only one.
It seems that you have a story you want to tell. What is it?
Somewhere on the forum there should be a list of those who call for killing police officers who enforce laws those members don't like. It'd give a clue of what mentality and ethics of the person you are debating on other topics has.
As Blackdog put it a outright ban on a basic constitutional inalienable right is not any old law or just simply a law we disagree with. The fact you would see a ban on the second amendment as just any old law and not worthy of a revolt only further proves you are no 2nd amendment proponent or advocate.Somewhere on the forum there should be a list of those who call for killing police officers who enforce laws those members don't like. It'd give a clue of what mentality and ethics of the person you are debating on other topics has.
Notice he keeps repeating "......because of laws you don't like" as if rights are a popularity contest. I've noticed that this is a phrase that seems to be a go to for multiple posters. I don't play populace games and don't care for emotional arguments, I have noticed though that this phrase seems to be the emotional counter every time the argument is lost by small percentage of posters here.As Blackdog put it a outright ban on a basic constitutional inalienable right is not any old law or just simply a law we disagree with. The fact you would see a ban on the second amendment as just any old law and not worthy of a revolt only further proves you are no 2nd amendment proponent or advocate.
Notice he keeps repeating "......because of laws you don't like" as if rights are a popularity contest. I've noticed that this is a phrase that seems to be a go to for multiple posters. I don't play populace games and don't care for emotional arguments, I have noticed though that this phrase seems to be the emotional counter every time the argument is lost by small percentage of posters here.
I tend to think so myself. Even if I didn't agree with the BOR in one fashion or another I would still be an advocate for keeping those I didn't like intact for I know that if any one falls the rest are up for grabs. As well I follow the mentality that the founding fathers were incredibly intelligent men and very much ahead of their time and in some ways ahead of ours as well.For some reason I think if the government banned a basic constitutional inalienable right that he is a proponent or adovcate of he wouldn't be using the "......because of laws you don't like" line.
Demand full payment at pre-ban retail value for all firearms prior to turning them in. It's a fun hobby, but not worth any sort of legal trouble (I only use them for target practice and as historical relics [WWII guns, main rifle for each participant]). I'm not in a situation where I can imagine needing one for self-defense. I wouldn't, however, take a full loss on the value of the guns, as I'd be taking a significant $ beatdown...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?