Revolution Timing?

[Drewman]

Hi, Guys-

As a new member I hate to "start out" by asking such a 'radical' question, but I am not new to the world of firearms or 2nd Amendment issues. I was reading some of the posts about our rights as free Americans, so this got my mind on this subject:


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Thomas Jefferson

When does time to time (as stated by our esteemed forefather) arrive?

I saw in an article recently where National Guard troops were going to be trained in some "urban warfare" exercises which was to include going house-to-house and inquire which houses had firearms in them, and practice "liberating" (confiscating) those found. This was in the States (Iowa, I think-don't remember, for sure) and the pre-exercise news release raised such a ruckus that they cancelled it. So-do we wait until these sorts of exercises become reality, or do we exercise our rights and stop the politicians before they "stop" us from being gun owners?

I would like to hear the opinions of my fellow TFL members, and would also be more than willing to discuss this (or any other related topic) one-on-one in email via IM, or on Skype.

Thanks for reading, and giving your input-

[Mike Irwin]

Generally this type of post is frowned up on here at TFL as, at its very core, expresses black letter illegal activities, i.e., the overthrow of the US government.

However, this one is worded a bit differently, more hypothetically, and has a poll, as opposed to some of the ones I've seen in the past that are essentially calls to revolution.

Anyone who chooses to respond had better keep in mind that the second any individual starts advocating FOR a commencement of revolution:

1. The thread will be closed.

2. The poster advocating armed insurrection will most likely be banned both to protect the good name and reputation of The Firing Line and to helpe protect the offending poster from himself.

[hogdogs]

I would, under no circumstance, join in an organized revolt. Beyond that, I ain't sayin' nuttin'...
Brent

[grymster2007]

I'm too fat, lazy and stupid to resist and it wouldn't take much to disarm me. The promise of a hamburger would see me willingly led off to the concentration camp.

What do you expect people to say here? And regardless what someone posts, more or less anonymously on the web, I would guess a whole bunch of the chest-thumping, "from my cold, dead hands", tough-guy crap would morph into mealy-mouthed compliance when the state security forces do show up.

[KLRANGL]

I'll stick with writing my legislators letters about how upset or happy I am with them for not support or supporting things I beleive in.
An organized revolt in and of itself is just a bad idea, but I would fight to protect my state from its enemies foreign or domestic. But we all know how well that turned out last time

[chris in va]

No way of knowing until something happens. Same for a SD situation.

[alloy]

Let's go three or four more election cycles first ok? Things have a way of going back and forth in our system to our benefit and everybody gets to try to run the country the way they want.

But hypothetically....if a zombie maniac ever got elected and started rounding up left handed people to make soylent green, i would hope that our official military still reads the Constitution.

[kestak]

Greetings,

I do not think an organized revolt will raise. Too many people are too complacent. I think it will be more small groups of anarchists targeting the wrong target (like McVee in the 90s). And I won't be part of that. NEVER.

Do you know how to boil a frog alive?
1 - Put the frog in cold water
2 - Raise the water temperature slowly up to the boiling point. The frog won't get out.

Bottom line, I think this country father thought about what is occuring right now and they built a safety in the Constitution. We should vote them all out...if we can do it before they legalize 25 mils illegals that would settle the Dem vote for a long time.

Thank you

[miroslav]

An armed uprising against the government by a small group of individuals would be pointless. No group of private citizens has the resources necessary to take on the government and overthrow it. And I highly doubt that there are any States thinking of seceding from the Union right now.

Any revolution today needs to happen through our political process, not against it. A revolution at the polls, if you will. If you're not happy with what your government is doing, then get involved. Vote out of office the people you don't like, keep track of how your representatives are voting, and write them to tell them what you think about the bills they are going to be voting on. Talk to your friends and relatives and get them involved too.

They say you shouldn't talk about politics in a polite conversation, I say bull[color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color] to that. If we don't start talking with each other and with our elected reps about how we feel, then those reps will just continue to do what they want, instead of what we (the people they are supposed to represent) want. Democracy only works for the people if they participate in it! How many people in our country today just don't care anymore, or think their one voice can't make any difference anyway so why try. The so called 'silent majority' has no power if it always remains silent.

[vranasaurus]

Let's remember prior to the American revolution a great deal of time was spent trying to get the king to cede to the demands of the colonists. The efforts at avoiding the revolution were quite substantial.

I think substantial effort must be expended to avoid any revolution. These activities include writing our elected officials, peaceful protests, acts of civil disobedience, etc. Only when all of that failed after being given a substantial opportunity would anyone even be justified in thinking about a revolt.

Revolution is not a good thing. They often destroy the very insitutions necessary to get back to a peaceful civil government. And very often people with repressive and undesireable beliefs end up leading the rebels and should they win it can be very bad for those not siding with the rebels.

The American Revolution is rare in history in that the results did lead to more freedom. Now you can argue that many did not acheive more freedom as a result and you would be correct but that was due to the cultural values and norms of the time and not the result of the revolution.

The ultimate result of the American Revolution was the US Constitution and that started us on the path to a great deal of freedom for all Americans. It contains a process to amend itself so that when we think it needs changing it can be done but it is purposely difficult. The process was used to end slavery, protect and expand voting rights, allow 18 y/o's to vote, allow for direct electin of Senators, and even codify many of our god given rights in the Bill of Rights.


Very often revolution results in less freedom and not more. Think Taliban, French Revolution, or Russian Revolution.


When you think of armed insurrection and the chaos that would follow think about a Mad Max type world and you would get very close to what the world might be like.

I swore an oath to support and defend the constitution and to obey the orders I am given. As long as the consitution is still the law of the land and it is being followed, and I don't mean my(or your) interpretation. As long as the people vote to elect the president and congress and the supreme court is interpreting the law, which is the interpretation that counts, I can't see any reason not to honor my oath.

[kestak]

Greetings,

Just a clarifier: Democracy does not work. The Fathers knew it. USA is not a democracy, but a Republic.

Initially, the Senators were not elected by the People. Having them elected by the People unbalanced the government.

Thank you

[Scorch]

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop...sAskingforKing
http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/henry-liberty.html
Before you start asking for something, make sure you are really ready.

[Brian Pfleuger]

The United States is a Constitutional Federal Republic, for the record.


Constitutional - a government by or operating under an authoritative document (constitution) that sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that determines the nature, functions, and limits of that government.

Federal republic - a state in which the powers of the central government are restricted and in which the component parts (states, colonies, or provinces) retain a degree of self-government; ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters who chose their governmental representatives.


We have a chance for revolution every few years. We just choose to waste that chance on the same fleabags every time.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Great social changes have been instituted in the USA by convincing the public of the correctness of your cause and wielding power via the ballot box.

African-americans were slaves and couldn't vote. Women couldn't vote. Now we have an African-american president and several viable female contenders for the presidency.

Wars that were not supported were ended by the ballot box and not by revolution.

Only some in the gun world are so fearful that they cannot convice others of the righteous nature of the RKBA and the use of the ballot box that they have to propose revolution and put on the tin foil combat beanie.

[grymster2007]

When does time to time (as stated by our esteemed forefather) arrive?

Maybe someday, but not today, tomorrow or any time in the foreseeable future. Like others have stated, I think revolution in this country can only take place at the ballot box. Even if a large number of the people rose in armed revolt, they would not have the resources and wherewithal to prevail against the government. And remember, the government would have a lot of support from the same people they've already bought and paid for with our tax dollars.

put on the tin foil combat beanie.

Do they have those with an integrated, flip-down, tactical colander?

[Bartholomew Roberts]

In looking to our forefathers for guidance, I think it is important to remember that one of their major complaints was that they had no representation. Our forefathers had actually organized politically long before the revolution and controlled many of the colonial legislatures. They owned newspapers. They were important leaders in their communities.

They weren't guys who were solely organized around the idea of an armed confrontation. They were masters of all the tools of modern warfare - communications, PR, information, logistics.

The great thing about the system they set up is it serves as a pretty reliable proxy for warfare without the destruction of infrastructure. If you can't win a political campaign, you probably aren't going to win an armed conflict either.

[44 AMP]

"Unintended Consequences" by John Ross.

While fiction, it does contain some very interesting viewpoints. In it, one of the characters is asked aquestion very similar to the one you are asking. "How do you know when it is time....?"

The answer given likens the situation to one where you meet a nice man, and get in the van with him. Things seem to be going well enough, until he gets out a set of handcuff, and asks you to wear them, for your "safety".

That is the time to resist. When the handcuffs come out. NOT after you put them on.

The trick, of course, is to recognise the handcuffs for what they are. Even if they have a cute fur cover on them.

I can't give you a definate answer of when that time is, only that it is not today. Tomorrow things may be different. I don't see any handcuffs yet. But there is something glinting in the distant light.

Welcome to the board, and enjoy!

[bojack2575]

The Oath of Enlistment (for enlistees):

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

The Oath of Office (for officers):

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance tot he same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

Now if we just had a president that beleived in the Constitution of the United States we shouldn't have anything to worry about...........right

[jeepstrapped]

I spend a modicum of time becoming aware of issues and practicing the power of the vote on a regular basis.

I think that if there are enough people worried about the direction of the USA, they should run for political office and make a change. Grassroots efforts have a way of fostering change.

According to nra.org, http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Faq/?s=1

While no absolute count is available, it is closely estimated that there are 60-65 million gun owners, 30-35 million of whom own handguns. According to survey research, at least 45% of American households own firearms.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Faq/?s=70

At the present time, NRA has approximately 4.3 million members. NRA does not compile demographic information on members.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Faq/?s=27

And according to http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html there are 306,164,648 people in the US.

Imagine of 1% of gun owners would run for political office, this would be 600,000 to 650,000 people who support gun rights running for political office. Heck, even if 1% of NRA members would run for office that would be 43,000 people who support gun rights running for political office.

If you want to affect change, put yourself in a position to affect the law.

So, my advice Drewman, is that if you are that passionate about gun rights, run for office on a platform supporting gun rights. With almost half of all households owning firearms there is support for the cause.
And if the posts on here recently bear true, there are even more gun owners out there now.
"edit" Be your own revolution and change the system from within. ;-)

Just my $.005

[bob.a]

Our Founders were coming off very heady times, having successfully separated themselves from the British through force of arms. Their statements praising revolution and watering the tree of Liberty should be viewed in light of their successful struggle; and by no means do I denigrate their achievements.

Still, they were fighting an outside oppressor based across a few thousand miles of ocean, which took weeks to traverse. Nowadays we elect our oppressors right here at home, and military force beyond the wildest nightmares of the Founding Fathers is available to them in hours, if not minutes.

Those who advocate getting involved in the political process have the key; however, it takes lots of treasure and time to mount a campaign, both of which require a broad base of support. Fortunately the federalist nature of our govt will prevent total oppression, but it might be necessary to live in, or move to, a state with a population that supports your beliefs.

Living in Maryland as I do, I'll probably have to move to be able to exercise the full rights of citizenship. It will probably come to that in a few years.

[vranasaurus]

In looking to our forefathers for guidance, I think it is important to remember that one of their major complaints was that they had no representation. Our forefathers had actually organized politically long before the revolution and controlled many of the colonial legislatures. They owned newspapers. They were important leaders in their communities.

They weren't guys who were solely organized around the idea of an armed confrontation. They were masters of all the tools of modern warfare - communications, PR, information, logistics.

The great thing about the system they set up is it serves as a pretty reliable proxy for warfare without the destruction of infrastructure. If you can't win a political campaign, you probably aren't going to win an armed conflict either.

You are correct. Convincing someone to vote for you is a hell of a lot easier than convincing them to pick up their gun a follow you to war.

If you have the ability to convince the requisite number of people to follow you to revolution through arms you certainly have he ability to recruit enough to win at the ballot box.

[gb_in_ga]

Personally, I can't go so far as to say that there is no way that I'd ever participate in a revolt against the powers that be. I recognize that a very significant reason the 2nd Amendment is there is to allow for revolution. The implied threat of revolution is part of the checks and balances of our political system. Disgusted as I am with the current powers that be in our Federal Government, I don't feel that now is the time to play the revolution card. It has to get even worse than it is (they have to actually carry out their intended plans), and we need to allow for a few election cycles to flush these miscreants out of the system before resorting to such. Now, if they were to just trash the system by suspending elections, declaring martial law, shooting or jailing the opposition, confiscating civilian weapons, or otherwise doing something like a rehash of the post-WWI Russia or the '30's Germany, then I'd change my mind in a hurry, as I suspect a whole lot of others would as well.

When the time for revolution comes, it'll be obvious to the reasonable patriotic person.

[pendennis]

One additional problem arises in the advent of a "revolution".

The Civil War was viewed as two different events. The South believed they were seceding from a voluntary entry into the United States. Abraham Lincoln believed, and proceeded with what he believed was an armed insurrection. This allowed him (again, in his belief), that habeas corpus could be suspended, and that he was allowed super-constitutional powers.

Lincoln was supported for the most part, by Northerners who believed in the preservation of the union.

This isn't to state that a successful secession couldn't succeed. It, however, seems unlikely.

[JuanCarlos]

Great social changes have been instituted in the USA by convincing the public of the correctness of your cause and wielding power via the ballot box.

African-americans were slaves and couldn't vote. Women couldn't vote. Now we have an African-american president and several viable female contenders for the presidency.

Wars that were not supported were ended by the ballot box and not by revolution.

Only some in the gun world are so fearful that they cannot convice others of the righteous nature of the RKBA and the use of the ballot box that they have to propose revolution and put on the tin foil combat beanie.

This.

That is the time to resist. When the handcuffs come out. NOT after you put them on.

The trick, of course, is to recognise the handcuffs for what they are. Even if they have a cute fur cover on them.

I can't give you a definate answer of when that time is, only that it is not today. Tomorrow things may be different. I don't see any handcuffs yet. But there is something glinting in the distant light.

Also, this. Revolution is always supposed to be a last resort, which is why many in polite society get a little uncomfortable when some folks like to talk just a little too much about it. It gives the impression that you're waiting for it. I hope any revolution doesn't come in my lifetime, or that of my children, or of their children.

As far as handcuffs go, there was an interesting post a while back in the old L&P forum basically explaining why second amendment rights are not the only concern to a free society, or even necessarily the greatest concern. As far as handcuffs go, I'd consider increasing restrictions on freedom of speech, press, and assembly to be much more worrying than some silly ban on semi-automatic rifles. The former are much more powerful tools to fight a tyrannical government, especially one as well-armed as ours, than an AR-15.

Not that the rifles won't help, of course. But one might argue that it's easier to get ahold of some rifles (there are plenty in the world, and somebody will always be willing to profit off a revolution) than to regain the ability to easily communicate, organize, and rally others to your cause.

[levrluvr]

Now, if they were to just trash the system by suspending elections, declaring martial law, shooting or jailing the opposition, confiscating civilian weapons, or otherwise doing something like a rehash of the post-WWI Russia or the '30's Germany, then I'd change my mind in a hurry, as I suspect a whole lot of others would as well.
When the time for revolution comes, it'll be obvious to the reasonable patriotic person.

This is pretty much how I feel on this topic. The Constitution is there to protect the people and limit the government. Those that have taken oaths to defend and protect it are likely to be prosecuted if they blatantly choose not to. The legal and election system are a far more preferable route to take to eject those that no longer think the Constitution is a viable document.