A Declaration of Civil Disobedience

[azredhawk44]

All I will say is...

Paper doesn't tell me what to do, nor does the mob. Reason and morality have that job.

We live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy. I will abide by the reasonable ideas that all men are created equal, and are given this single opportunity in life to pursue all excellence that is available to them. Any men who attempt to harm or steal from an otherwise peaceful man merit any and all defensive violence levied against them.

And pax...I guess women fall into that boat too, but they have to use a .380 at most 'cause they can't handle the recoil of anything bigger.

[OneInTheChamber]

While I agree with the article, the

Screw 'em.

written in one of the follow posts is not a bright idea.

Is that what you say to a cruise missile you never saw coming??? Or the M1A Abrams parked on your lawn? Or that mark 19 that is pounding your house into the dust? Or how about that Apache that is strafing your neighborhood?

The biggest cache, sadly, of civilian armory is no match for a single F-16. YOu'd have to hope that the military defies the gov't too and joins your side.

[MicroBalrog]

The biggest cache, sadly, of civilian armory is no match for a single F-16.

Unless the F-16 is parked on it's runway and you are giggling insanely as you aim your puny Mosin 1891/1933 at the guy who is supposed to be refueling it tomorrow as he goes to take a piss.

[Trip20]

+1 to post #1. I hope you still feel the same way. It's been a few years..., Marko.

[pax]

Originally Posted by trip20

+1 to post #1. I hope you still feel the same way. It's been a few years..., Marko.

Yeah it has.

Marko, how does the presence of the Munchkin in your life change any of what you wrote? Does it? Anything you'd add or subtract if you were penning this today?

pax

[Fjolnirsson]

The biggest cache, sadly, of civilian armory is no match for a single F-16. YOu'd have to hope that the military defies the gov't too and joins your side.

Nonsense. The F-16 is dependent upon men. Men who fuel it, men who service it, men who fly it,men who tell those men where to fly it, and men who give orders to the men who tell the pilots where to fly. Every piece of military equipment in the US is has a weakness. The key is exploiting those weaknesses.
Look at Iraq. Look at what some people with "inferior weaponry" have done. If civvilian weaponry were no match for an F-16, we'd have only sent one, and all our troops would be home from the sandbox already. An F-16 can lay down intense fire, sure. But it takes infantry to clear a city, or to hold a territiory. In the Warsaw ghetto, a small group of untrained men, using weapons they had no familiarity with, held off the German war machine for weeks. The Germans had to level the city to beat that group of men. The same applies wherever you go. The US government wants its cities intact and producing wealth, not leveled, or glowing.

[Double Naught Spy]

I am always amazed by those who consider what they do to protect themselves with firearms to be so darned well informed, extremely pragmatic, and even training and practicing on a regular basis to handle threats and then publically proclaim to the government that they will be breaking the law in a manner they perceive to be on their terms, because they are so smart and pragmatic.

I don't know about y'all, but proclaiming to the government that you will not be obeying the laws of the land is a stupid tactic. It is a stupid tactic like spilling your guts to the cops about a shooting you were just in that you feel quite good about, only the story you feel quite good about isn't jiving with what the cops are getting from others and so your story ends up being what gets you in trouble, not gets you out of trouble.

Of course, should the government follow up on any of this, you can tell Bubba just how smart you are and you will then be out of the loop for helping to protect your family. It is tough to protect things and loved ones back home when you are in jail.

[DAWGTRAXX]

very well done


MOLON LABE!


QUOTE:
"If it ever comes to armed resistance, we will lose. Any such fight will be a fight for defiance, not for victory." -- AnotherPundit

...you're wrong; and the entire history of guerilla warfare proves it.



hmmmm, well if my long ago history classes remind me of anything..it's that the american revolution was in essence a guerilla war




just mention Afganistan to the Russians

[buckster]

Yes an ever growing number of legal law abiding citizens are gearing up , but so is the occupying forces. A division of Hallaburton has been awarded a non competitive bid of 385.000,000 to build detention camps and I don't think it is for illegals. Remember RED DAWN? Yes and it will be on an house by house basis. The first thing they did was stuff the patriot act down our throats to label dissenters as terrorists and they are stopping and checking everybody because when builds to critical mass, even grandma will fight back. This parallels 1930's Germany. They used terror to blame their opposition and take rights away! Now every country is using it. But people who are armed are citizens, people who are not are subjects of the state. We can turn it around by exposing the people behind this, and not by shots for it would be like bringing a knife to a gun fight, but we still have the 1st and the 2nd it comes down to it.

[BreacherUp!]

This thread has become very disheartening. I cannot believe that members of this forum are openly advocating shooting soldiers, LEOs, sniping plane refuelers. I mean really, [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color], over?! Many of these posters are not just spewing hot air. They seem to be ready and willing to do harm to other Americans who are carrying out the duties of their professions.
Staff: allowing this to continiue only helps gun control advocates in their cause. It only weakens the "ambassador of gun rights" title that this forum wishes to convey.
I sincerely hope that this BS thread gets closed down with a quickness.

[tyme]

BreacherUp, what are these duties of which you speak? Attacking private citizens for their possession of plant material, for their religion, for their possession of a few firearms? Don't forget that the first duty of every government employee is to uphold the Constitution.

[BreacherUp!]

Tyme, though your questions have merit, they do not excuse some of the desired and posted actions of some members.
Lets not mix one discussion (shooting sworn officers and servicemen) with the debate of Constitutionality.

[tyme]

"...desired and posted actions..."

There's no evidence that anyone in recent times has pulled a Henry Bowman, because it would have been all over the news. Given the number of people who talk about that possibility, and the number of recent unfortunate turns in politics, the people you seem so worried about should be the last of your worries. As a group, they show remarkable restraint. It seems clear to me that nobody wants any of this to happen, or it would have already happened.

[ccwolff]

Wow a relly good thread.

Anyone who comes to my home to take my guns will not be "sworn officers and servicemen" Having been in the millitary I can tell you that disarming citizens would not have been something I would have ever gone along with,in fact just the opposite. The only people that would obey those orders (Illegal orders at that, no matter the Amendment that would make it legal) are thieves and traitors despite whatever uniform they wear. On that day when I get my door knocked down I will treat them as such.

Molon Labe.

[shaggy]

Confiscations? LEOs going house to house?

Baloney.

As much as it pains me to say it, I truly believe the 2nd Amendment will die a slow death over a period of decades and eventually pass into irrelevance with little notice by the public. We're just watching the very beginning stages of the cancer now. Just look at the timeline of major federal gun control legislation:

1934 -(34 years)- 1968 -(18 years)- 1986 -(8 years)- 1994

Certainly it seems to be accelerating, but keep in mind the worst component of the 1994 legislation had to include a time limit to pass and is now expired.

The relevant point being, the elimination of the 2nd Amendment is not something the government is going to accomplish in a short period and they know it. This is something that could take several generations and I think the government is prepared to let it die a long slow death. Despite all the chest-thumping going on here, I doubt any of us wil live long enough to see the final nails put in the coffin of the 2nd Amendment.

Every year more and more ranges and open land that used to be used fo shooting and hunting gets shut down because of urban sprawl and new housing developments. Fewer places to shoot translates into less interest in guns. Less interest in guns means less market. Less market means financial death of the manufacturers.

Initiatives like ballistic fingerprinting and integral gun locks. These increase the cost of guns and place them out of the financial reach of more people. Again, it boils down to a diminished market and financial death for the manufacturers. We've already seen it in some states and those ideas are spreading.

All out bans. Lets face it, if you think there won't be another "assault weapons ban" you need to put down the crack pipe. The democrats and gun banners won't make the same mistakes they made in 1994 again, and the next one will be far more comprehensive. It may be another 20years before they can get something like that through or it could be right after the next presidential election. It will happen though, and when it does, people will be able to keep what they've got, but those guns will eventually break down, fail, and turn into expensive clubs when their owners can't get parts to maintain and service them. Eventually, no one will care about the rusty old M1A sitting in the corner because it doesn't work and you can't get parts for it anyway.

Ammo. All Congress has to do is pass a significant tax on ammo and components and we're all on borrowed time. When Senator Monihan (sp?) was in the senate, I think he proposed a 10,000% tax on ammo every year. He's gone now, but I'm sure there's some people in Congress who have those very same ideas. Think about 'sin taxes' on other products at the state level - a box of cigarettes costs about $8 in NYC, most of which is tax. Now think of the effect if a similar tax was enacted nationally on ammo & components. Its not nearly as far-fetched as LEOs going house to house.

Bottom line is the government will slowly strangle the life out of the manufacturers and the market, reducing the public's interest in guns to the point where very few people will own guns or care about those who do. I think they're prepared to let it take decades if need be to avoid the cost, logistical problems, and inherent dangers for something so stupid and ridiculous as going house to house to collect them when millions of households have guns. It will be a very slow death by incrementalism.

Frog, meet pot...

[jcoiii]

If this ever became law, I turn in my badge and "issued" firearm the second I am required to enforce it.

[Trip20]

If this ever became law, I turn in my badge and "issued" firearm the second I am required to enforce it.

You're a good American.

[12-34hom]

Shaggy, great post.

Although hardly as dramatic as all the JBT's going "house to house" confiscating everyones personal weapons.....:barf:

But, the tinfoil hat crowd needs something to yap about and the crutch they lean on for their woes is usually has something to do with authority.

12-34hom.

[MicroBalrog]

I don't know about y'all, but proclaiming to the government that you will not be obeying the laws of the land is a stupid tactic.

You may want to tell it to Henry David Thoreaus, Mahatma Ghandi, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Philip Berrigan, SoulForce, etc. etc. etc.

[Edward429451]

I don't know about y'all, but proclaiming to the government that you will not be obeying the laws of the land is a stupid tactic

Well, yes and no. It's really just a numbers game. If more people did it, it wouldn't be stupid and it would have lots of effect. The thing that makes it stupid is to go it alone with predictable results. My respect goes to the principled folks who wont give in for the fear.

Of course, should the government follow up on any of this, you can tell Bubba just how smart you are and you will then be out of the loop for helping to protect your family. It is tough to protect things and loved ones back home when you are in jail.

That's the crux of it huh? Fear. So if we fear them and back down, then we're smart? Is that what you're really saying?

I subscribe to the notion that if you've got nothing worth dieing for, then you've really got nothing to live for either.

Suppose we do the 'smart' thing and back down, turn em in, and sit home with our families who we love so much and want to protect. Are we supposed to consider the posterity? Or do they not count because their not immediate family? Where do you draw the line on family?

Your logic is reasonably well stated but is full of holes. I must disagree.

[Megaloman84]

I hold these truths to be self-evident: that everyone is endowed with certain equal and inalienable rights, among them the rights to life, liberty and property.

To protect their rights, people may delegate certain powers to a government. Government, for its part, can derive just power only from the consent of the governed. Whenever government become destructive of their rights, people may exercise the right to alter or abolish it as they see fit.

Our present government complies with none of these principles and never has.

The government purports to derive its authority from the Constitution, which it styles as a lawful contract between we the people and itself, our supposed representatives. This "contract" has never been openly and formally consented to by even a single person in the customary manner, that is, by signing, sealing and delivering it. Instead, the Constitution was drafted by a small group of land-owning men, and then ratified by an only slightly less small group of land-owning men in a process conducted entirely by secret ballot. If any person, ever, at any time, consented to be bound by the terms of the Constitution, they did so in such a covert way that it cannot ever be conclusively proven who they are and when they consented to it. In short, the Constitution is not an open, authentic and lawful contract, but merely a compact between a secretive gang of criminals. It is not a lawful, delegation of just power from people to their representatives, but rather a criminal conspiracy by one secretive cabal of elites to bind the remainder of the population to their will, by force if necessary.

Since the ratification of the Constitution, the "representatives" it supposedly empowered have conducted themselves in a similarly secretive and criminal way. They wield great authority on nothing more than the supposed support, by secret ballot, of some group of people rarely, if ever, even rumored to approach a majority of the total population. Since no "representative" can point to even a single person who has openly and honestly delegated a shred of power to him, and cannot even prove that a single specific person has covertly assented to his rule, no "representative" can reasonably be said to have any constituents as all. Thus, all of our "elected representative" exercise no authority whatsoever but their own. They rob, murder and enslave us on no basis beside their own personal inclination to do so.

However, all that aside, the actions of the government and its agents are still illegitimate and criminal. It would be absurd to suggest that a person may delegate to another a power that he himself does not have.

If I do not have the right to kick in my neighbor's door, kidnap him and seize his justly acquired property because I do not like him owning a gun, growing hemp, spanking his children, or using the wrong sexual position with his Mrs, then I may not delegate the right to do so to my government. Anybody who behaves like this, whether they claim to be doing so on someone else's behalf or not, is nothing more than a criminal and deserves to be treated accordingly.

Finally, not even the pretense that the government rests on the "consent of the governed" can be maintained given the example of the War Between the States, which was fought to impose "the government of the people, by the people, for the people" on the people, at the point of a bayonet. This tragic episode in American history revealed our government's true nature for all to see, just another tyranny built and maintained solely on the threat of naked force.

However, despite the obvious disdain with which I regard the government and its agents, I cannot advocate the use of force against it. While military/LE personnel, politicians, government contractors, members of the judiciary, bureaucrats, civil servants, government bond-holders and others related classes of scum are unequivocally criminal, while the worst among them clearly deserve nothing less than death, attempting to impose this penalty on them would yield results far worse than their current abuses.

Violent revolt, either open and widespread or covert and highly localized, would result in a lethal response by government forces that would lead to massive civilian casualties; even if the rebels took care not to inflict any themselves. The government has demonstrated over and over again that it utterly lacks scruples when it comes to "collateral damage" or even deliberate acts of terrorism. While it would ultimately be those behind the gun cameras of the Apache helicopters and AC-130 "Spectre" gunships who would be responsible for the mass murder of innocents, we should not be able, in good conscience, to initiate a chain of events that would lead to the needless deaths of so many.

An additional danger is that widespread partisan conflict could erupt, pitting separatist/rebel factions against loyalist irregulars in brutal, bloody guerilla warfare right amidst the civilian population, Acts of vengeance and retribution would inevitably flow in both directions should such a scenario arise.

Furthermore violent revolutions are prone to hijacking by extremists and megalomaniacs who use them to impose their own brand of tyranny after the successful conclusion of hostilities.

Finally, whenever violence is used there is always the danger that it will be over-used. Once the revolution has succeeded, assuming it can succeed, what is to prevent a repeat of the years following the french revolution?

You may be thinking that my outlook is pretty bleak, However, I remain optimistic that liberty and justice for all can be made into more than a compulsory oath of fealty with which to indoctrinate young children.

The truth is that we don't need to fire a single shot to reform or remove our present government. I quote the words of Ettienne de la Boetie from his masterpiece of nonviolent resistance, Discourse on Voluntary Servitude

Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives. All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves? You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them, you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows---to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check. From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces?

[Supertac]

bump

[Harley Quinn]

This is truly revealing as to the mind set of the staff of this board.

You have to wonder, whence came you?

HQ

[Supertac]

Originally Posted by HQ

This is truly revealing as to the mind set of the staff of this board.

You have to wonder, whence came you?

HQ

Whence came I? I am from the Bay Area. I don't know you, but I'm just a normal guy who loves our great country and Contitution. I'm always available to plink at the range if you want.

[Harley Quinn]

We have a nice shooting indoor range here in Elk Grove for pistols and other low velocity weapons.

Shoot me a PM.

HQ