How our NFA rights were stolen from us

[Al Norris]

I understand that discussing the ultimate check and balence against government abuse is a forbidden subject here.

Just a point of order.

Such discussions are not so much as forbidden, as they are discouraged. Why, you might ask? Because all too often, someone will begin foaming at the mouth (so to speak) and actually call for insurrection. <-- That is what is forbidden.

I tend to keep in mind, what Judge Alex Kozinski wrote in his dissent to Silveira:

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed; where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once. "

We are not even close to those criteria. It's unfortunate, some do not really think before they hit the "Submit" button.

[maestro pistolero]

I have always thought that as long as we still have a vote, we have no business taking up arms against the government. If we are unhappy with our government, a vote can change it.

True tyranny doesn't allow itself to be voted out of power. The present enemies to liberty and democracy is apathy and ignorance.

[ISC]

At what point to we recognize that our votes have become meaningless due to corruption? The Nazis and Soviets both had elections, but they were meaningless due to state control of the media and intimidation or outright bans of other parties.

We aren't there yet, thank God. But if racist groups are allowed to display weapons at polling places and openly advocate violence in the streets isn't that the direction we're headed?

When a grassroots political party is labeled as racist because they advocate enforcing the law and they are subsequently targeted for investigations and legal harrassment, that is a bad sign.

[BlueTrain]

Sounds like some people just don't like the way the election turned out. That's happened before, and what people did had serious consequences. What law is it that you are referring to. Ones that say you can be stopped on the street and demand that you show your papers?

[ADB]

At what point to we recognize that our votes have become meaningless due to corruption? The Nazis and Soviets both had elections, but they were meaningless due to state control of the media and intimidation or outright bans of other parties.

We aren't there yet, thank God. But if racist groups are allowed to display weapons at polling places and openly advocate violence in the streets isn't that the direction we're headed?

You need to watch less Glenn Beck. It's rotting your brain.

[maestro pistolero]

You need to watch less Glenn Beck. It's rotting your brain.

Take it easy there, cowboy. How about contributing to the discussion instead of offering ad-hoc insults?

If anyone isn't seriously disturbed by this administration's indefensible tolerance for one of the most abhorrent enemies of democracy, i.e.voter intimidation by threat of violence, I would suggest perhaps a little Glen Beck may be just what the doctor ordered. And I'm not even a fan.

[alloy]

We'll have to decide on a personal basis where we draw the line and refuse to follow orders and enforce unconstitutional laws.

Is leaving that decision as a personal one, an admission that some may have already had their drawn lines....crossed...since you say that the line is a moving target? Seems a dangerous standard which could only lead to a spontaneous combustion within the uniformed services and general confusion among the population in the unlikely event of a crisis.

[ISC]

OK, I don't see why there was any cause for any attacks.

I was trying to show how the civil rights movement was an outgrowth of the discriminatory laws against blacks and how the sitting around quietly and voting for sympathetic politicians wasn't enough to end those violation of an entire group's civil rights.

In the 50's and 60's there was blatant and open intimidation against blacks who tried to vote or register to vote. Selma and Montgomery was about more than an old woman who was too tired stand on a bus.

40 years later we have the anti gun political machine in Chicago flaunting their corruption (Blagoivich, Daley, etc). ACORN has been proven to have registered thousands of fictitious voters and bussing them into precincts they don't live in so they could vote (more than one time IMO). Mn had Norm Coleman's 4000 vote lead turn into a 312 vote loss where 350 felons were known by the state to have voted and where in the recount the local election officials made photocopies of original ballots and then mixed them in with the originals, resulting in several precincts having more votes cast than there were registered voters.

Anti gun Massachusetts and other gun unfriendly states are attempting to usurp the constitution by bypassing the electoral college. That would allow states that would elect anti gun politicians to use the vote rigging common to their states (in some of these places it's very common for people to continue voting for years after they die) to drown out the honest votes.

If things continue to go down this path, I don't think it's so unrealistic to suspect that anti 2nd amendment forces could steal more elections. If that happens what are our options?

Is a million gun owners march going to meet the same results that the bonus army did in the 30's? If you don't know what I mean by that you are either woefully ignorant of our history or a victim of revisionist history.

Can we stage successfull rallies if all but one news station ignores it like they did the tea party?

What should we do the next time a Hughes type amendment is inserted into a bill requiring universal registration or a federal license to own more than 10 guns and 1000 rounds of ammo? Both of those amendments have been proposed and will probably come up again.

[alloy]

OK, I don't see why there was any cause for any attacks.

If that is for me...my post was no attack, it was a question, one you seem to already be pondering, and one that could be easily answered yes or no. Don't take it personal....just chit-chat on a forum.

[ISC]

Originally Posted by ADB

You need to watch less Glenn Beck. It's rotting your brain

That was the insult I was talking about.

Alloy, you've make a good point, and many soldiers and police have already decided that the line was too close and left the service or found different careers.

At the start of the Civil War there was a scene that played out at West Point where all the cadets with Southern sympathies left the academy to return to their states to fight for the Confederacy. What a tragic moment that must have been to experience. I pray that we never have to live through that sort of upheaval again. Was the Civil War neccesary? I don't think so, but I think that it occurred because the system was broken and too many people thought that their own state's interests were more important than figuring out a peaceful resolution within the guidelines set by the constitution.

[alloy]

Alloy, you've make a good point, and many soldiers and police have already decided that the line was too close and left the service or found different careers.

An unfortunate paradox, I suppose.

[ADB]

If anyone isn't seriously disturbed by this administration's indefensible tolerance for one of the most abhorrent enemies of democracy, i.e.voter intimidation by threat of violence

One kook stood outside one polling precinct with a nightstick, taking no other action; the police were called, he was escorted away, and his already ridiculous little fringe group suspended his membership for a year. That's a pretty low bar for "voter intimidation by force of violence," but it provides the opportunity for a few people with loud voices to make things up in order to spread fearmongering.

Moreover, "this administration" that you're referring to was the Bush administration that dropped the lawsuit--as they were right to do, since prosecuting it would have cost a small fortune and resulted in nothing but a restraining order.

[BlueTrain]

I've long since lost sight of what rights that we were talking about in the first place. But no matter.

It goes without saying that many, many issues are involved here, some peculiar to the United States, others of a more general nature. But first, I think even the word "militia" has picked up a bad reputation. Today it has more of a connotation of a private army owned and operated by a warlord, though some legitimate armies have had warlords that essentially had their own private armies, after a fashion. That is a bad thing, too, because they exist for the benifit of the warlord, not the country. And some people might also think of privately organized group of armed men meeting somewhere off in the hills planning what to do after civilization goes to the dogs, feral dogs, I presume. Not a good picture. There is also an armed security industry that has arisen in this country that somehow ought to be taken into account but it is flying below radar to most people.

One thing is that even a constitutional law can be written so that it can't be obeyed. And some laws are harsh and unevenly applied, no matter what your rights might be. Even the mild laws are often unevenly applied, I imagine. That's where the police come in to the picture. Since they are the point of contact, so to speak, between the law and the citizens, they are called upon every day to decide just how much law to enforce. For among other things, they ultimately have to have the support of the citizens in order to function efficiently and fairly. Otherwise, nothing works well.

[Dave P]

"I tend to keep in mind, what Judge Alex Kozinski wrote in his dissent to Silveira:

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed; where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once. "

We are not even close to those criteria. It's unfortunate, some do not really think before they hit the "Submit" button. "

I truly believe that "courts have lost the courage to oppose" already. One example is the appointment by BO of the medical czar, while congress was in recess. No opposition to that flagrant violation.

Or his unauthorized take-over of GM. Everyone is turning the other cheek.

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by DaveP

I truly believe that "courts have lost the courage to oppose" already. One example is the appointment by BO of the medical czar, while congress was in recess. No opposition to that flagrant violation.

Or his unauthorized take-over of GM. Everyone is turning the other cheek.

Dave, unless or until someone brings a proper lawsuit to the courts, how can they (the judges) possibly rule on any of the above? The courts are not empowered to select their own suit and issue injunctions. They can only decide cases that are properly brought before them by plaintiffs.

[ADB]

One example is the appointment by BO of the medical czar, while congress was in recess. No opposition to that flagrant violation.

By "medical czar" I assume you mean the new head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services... What violation? Article 2, section 2, says "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." The first recess appointment in the US was done by George Washington in 1795. Hell, Eisenhower used a recess appointment to put William Brennan on the Supreme Court.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My call - politics, refighting the Civil War, talk show loonies, insults.

This was a risky thread to begin with but there have been warnings and I don't see it going anywhere useful and some of you might get in trouble.

Closed.