Firearm owner responds to toledo blade article

This is a discussion on Firearm owner responds to toledo blade article within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Great read: Saturday, April 28, 2007 Guest Editorial: "Kill All They Send..." [Foreword: This may make some uncomfortable, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Firearm owner responds to toledo blade article

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850

    Firearm owner responds to toledo blade article

    Great read:


    Saturday, April 28, 2007
    Guest Editorial: "Kill All They Send..."

    [Foreword: This may make some uncomfortable, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. And after all, it's just a hypothetical "ping," but one I believe should be transmitted far and wide.]

    "Kill All They Send..."
    The Modest Proposal of "Homer Simpson's Dumber Brother" for Gun Confiscation & A Modest Counter-Proposal

    By Mike Vanderboegh
    Pinson, AL

    "Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms." — Robert Heinlein

    "Hell, let's just start shooting the *******s. Let's get this crap over with while I'm still young enough to march in the victory parade down Pennsylvania Avenue." -- An American gun owner, overheard in a Birmingham, Alabama, gun store, 27 April 2007.

    Career Foreign Service Officer and former Ambassador Daniel H. Simpson, now slumming in retirement as a member of the Toledo Blade & Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's editorial board, has a modest proposal entitled "The Disarming of America." Unlike Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" for the Irish poor to alleviate their hunger by eating their children, I think Ambassador Dan is really serious about his. A snippet:

    "The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm.

    Clearly, since such sweeps could not take place all across the country at the same time. But fairly quickly there would begin to be gun-swept, gun-free areas where there should be no firearms. If there were, those carrying them would be subject to quick confiscation and prosecution. On the streets it would be a question of stop-and-search of anyone, even grandma with her walker, with the same penalties for 'carrying.'" -- The Toledo Blade, Wednesday, April 25, 2007

    "In Timor Veritas"?

    Not surprisingly the gun rights community has evinced more than a little anger at this brazen proposal for their disarmament and enslavement. David Codrea, whose War On Guns blogspot I greatly admire, has referred to Ambassador Dan as "Homer Simpson's Dumber Brother." Certainly Dan Simpson, if he is serious, has got to be one stupid human being not to anticipate the unintended consequences of his declaration, which plays into the worst fears and direst predictions of American gun rights advocates since the 1968 Gun Control Act. Yet, since the DC gun law was struck down by the Federal Appeals Court, the hoplophobes have become more open in their demands: we hear less about "reasonable restrictions" and much more about repealing the Second Amendment. Heck, even here in Alabama we've had a proposal (House Bill 600) to register every semi-automatic rifle, pistol and shotgun in private hands in the state. Of course it doesn't have a snowball's chance of being passed, but. . . then why introduce it?

    The Romans used to say "In vino veritas", or, "In wine there is truth." But these folks are not, as near as we can tell, drunk. Perhaps what we are dealing with is "In timor veritas"-- In fear there is truth. Cops have been known to inadvertently scare suspects so much that they blurted out their own unintended confessions and perhaps that is what is going on here. The gun grabbers are nervous. The Virginia Tech massacre was supposed to strengthen their legislative hand, yet it is the gunnies who seem the stronger for it now. We didn't react the old timorous NRA way as they expected us to. Those of us who share the traditional American values of the Founder's republic-- faith, responsibility, opportunity and armed defense of liberty-- have finally been pushed to the point that they've made us fighting mad. We've been pushed to the point where it is WE who are beginning to push back. And with their calls for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, the gun control crowd is risking not just a push but a punch in the nose.

    They look at the massacre and see the need for more regulation, registration and confiscation. We look at the dead innocents, deliberately disarmed and made easy targets in a carefully crafted, firearm-free environment, and blame their big liberal lies and unintended idiocies for the body count. "Gun Free School Zone" is a lie every bit as much as "Arbeit Macht Frei" and every bit as deadly. We see these bright young kids and talented professors who were killed without a hope of self defense, who were killed, indeed, by liberalism itself, and we blame the butchers with immaculate hands who cleared the way for the killer and made it all possible. Yet it is WE, the law-abiding and self-reliant, who are blamed by THEM, the servile toadies of collectivism. Our rising anger is in fact a measure of how close we are coming to a final break in this country between our two competing visions of America. Indeed, if Homer Simpson's dumber brother is serious, the opening shots of this impending civil war cannot be that far away.

    One Ping Only (Please Deposit 50 Cents)

    Captain Ramius: "Re-verify our range to target... one ping only."
    Capt. Vasili Borodin: "Captain, I - I - I just..."
    Captain Ramius: "Give me a ping, Vasili. One ping only, please."
    Capt. Vasili Borodin: "Aye, Captain."
    "The Hunt for Red October," 1990

    But let us assume that, for the sake of argument and illustration, Ambassador Dan's proposal is serious. Let us assume that he is presenting us with a fictional fascist future backdrop that we may play like a video game. Let us believe for the moment in the literal word of former Foreign Service Officer Daniel H. Simpson's proposal yet conjure up our own modest fictional counter-proposal. Like Captain Ramius in "The Hunt for Red October," Ambassador Dan has given us a ping. Let us then give him one ping back. These pings (his and ours) may be warnings, threats of imminent attack, pleas for understanding, or attempts at communication across the gulf of a vast, dense ocean which prevents any other way of determining real meaning. But in any case let us play a game, starting with the scenario he has given us:

    "The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building."

    Our modest counter-proposal posits the following:

    1. Like the American Revolution, one third of populace will side with the King, one third with the opposition and one third will blow with the wind and take what comes. Of the resistant third, less than a third of those will risk anything to give form to their beliefs, thus only about ten or so percent of the population, roughly 30 million citizens, will actively support the folks who will engage Dan's "special squads". (You know the Nazis called their special squads "Einsatzgruppen.") In the Revolution, the active combatants, Continentals and militia, only amounted to 3% of the population. That would be about 10 million anti-confiscation guerrillas. Alternatively, we could use 10% of American gun owners as a good rule of thumb, and that would be just 8.5 million. But let's make it even tougher on ourselves. Let us say for the sake of argument that as a result of liberal media propaganda and the cumulative deleterious effect of liberal government schools, just one percent of American gun owners would fall into the "cold dead hands" category: that's a mere 850 thousand. These would be the hard core-- the men and women who know how to kill at range, and who, with their scoped .30-06 deer rifles can out-range and out-shoot the M16 rifles and 9mm submachine guns of Dan's American Einsatzgruppen.

    2. Unlike the American Revolution, the civil war will reflect the coarsening of the rules of war and will look more like Iraq or Bosnia. The war would certainly extend to those whose direct and support it-- civilian or not-- as they are primary targets, far more so than the foot soldiers of Ambassador Dan's Einsatzgruppen. Bill Clinton extended our own rules of war in the Kosovo intervention to include the news media and other propagandists as legitimate targets. Under these rules, Ambassador Dan and his anti-gun ilk would all be dead men. But, this is just a hypothetical word representation of a video game of Simpson's fictional fascist future, so they need not be afraid just yet.

    3. The war would not end until one vision of America or the other won. It would be war to the knife and knife to the hilt. The 850,000 traditional Americans would be determined to take as many of the Einsatzgruppen, their commanders and controllers with them as possible. And it would be far greater than a one-to-one ratio. The fanaticism that the liberals have always imputed to us, would in the event, become real and deadly. If Ambassador Dan's future fascists do win, it will be a Pyrrhic victory that would, for destruction and casualties, dwarf all of America's wars put together. Which, if you think of it, is a funny way to have a "safe" society.


    "Kill all they send..."

    Viet Minh Sergeant: "Do we take prisoners?"
    Lt. Col. Nguyen Huu An: "No. Kill all they send... and they will stop coming." -- The Opening Scene of "We Were Soldiers"

    What would be the casualties? God alone knows, but they would be horrific. How would the government prosecute such a policy with their own police and military honeycombed with potential "traitors"? Poorly, I suspect. How many of those soldiers and policemen that Ambassador Dan is counting on to disarm us would, in the event, turn their weapons on the "National Command Authority"? More than enough to make success for his future fascists problematic. And not even during the previous civil war of 1861-1865 did an American army attempt operations with armed opponents astride and within its own logistical tail. And it would be a WAR, make no mistake, not the sanitary "police action" of the scenario of Homer's dumber brother. And how would the big bad boys of the ATF and FBI fare against committed freedom fighters? Even well-paid federal police bureaucrats just want to live until retirement. How long do you think they would last when team after team of them are shot down like dogs in the street, garroted in their sleep, poisoned in their mess halls, or found with their throats slit in guardposts, restrooms and bordellos? We will kill all you send, Ambassador Dan, until they stop coming.

    "Bzzzzt. Boink. Beep. Game over. Please deposit 50 cents."

    So, thus ends the intellectual, hypothetical exercise posed by this mandarin class former Foreign Service professional turned newspaper expositor of tyrannical schemes. Let us disclaim that no treasonous, gun-grabbing editorialists were harmed in the crafting of this fictional counter-proposal. But of course, if he's SERIOUS. . . . ;-)

    http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/0...they-send.html

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fork Union, Virginia
    Posts
    2,691
    Sounds like we're heading down a path we have travelled before.........

    Does this ring any bells?:
    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

    He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

    He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

    He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

    He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

    He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

    He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

    He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

    He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

    He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

    He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

    He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

    He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

    He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:.


    For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

    For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

    For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

    For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

    For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

    For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

    For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

    For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

    He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

    He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

    He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

    He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

    He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

    In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

    Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred. to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

    We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
    (Sorry to be so long, but I had to include the WHOLE thing.)
    Last edited by goawayfarm; May 4th, 2007 at 10:04 PM.
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.-Seneca

    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. If I have a gun, what do I have to be paranoid about?" -Clint Smith

    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array p8riot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chesterfield, VA
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    ....
    What would be the casualties? God alone knows, but they would be horrific. How would the government prosecute such a policy with their own police and military honeycombed with potential "traitors"? Poorly, I suspect. How many of those soldiers and policemen that Ambassador Dan is counting on to disarm us would, in the event, turn their weapons on the "National Command Authority"? More than enough to make success for his future fascists problematic. And not even during the previous civil war of 1861-1865 did an American army attempt operations with armed opponents astride and within its own logistical tail. And it would be a WAR, make no mistake, not the sanitary "police action" of the scenario of Homer's dumber brother. And how would the big bad boys of the ATF and FBI fare against committed freedom fighters? Even well-paid federal police bureaucrats just want to live until retirement. How long do you think they would last when team after team of them are shot down like dogs in the street, garroted in their sleep, poisoned in their mess halls, or found with their throats slit in guardposts, restrooms and bordellos? We will kill all you send, Ambassador Dan, until they stop coming.
    To quote a poster on FreeRepublic.com

    Thread

    "...the government, riven with dissent, not knowing where its enemies are, trying to send soldiers who don't agree with it into harm's way, has a harder time. It's terribly expensive to put down a popular insurrection, and many insurrections don't even stay where they're put."
    "You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." - Al Capone

    The second amendment is the reset button of our Constitution.

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array Chooie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,870
    Wow.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array SammyIamToday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,087
    Absolutely great read.
    ...He suggested that "every American citizen" should own a rifle and train with it on firing ranges "at every courthouse." -Chesty Puller

  7. #6
    Member Array Longbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Montana, USA
    Posts
    396
    Thank you for posting this.
    "Planning to draw and chamber a round after TSHTF is like planning to fasten your seatbelt after you see the other guy run a stopsign..."

    Professional hand engraver.
    To see full picture of knife in Avatar click here

  8. #7
    Member Array Raider39a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    335
    awesome read. Hitler's Germany and Marcos' Philippines initial push for complete control of their populace is to ban private ownership of firearms. The end result: a subjugated populace where dissension is punished by the disapperance of you and your loved ones.

    I don't believe that similar conditions will be ever tolerated in America.
    Last edited by Raider39a; May 5th, 2007 at 11:30 AM. Reason: spelling
    "embrace the suck" - our warriors in the sandbox... it implies that do the best you can in impossible conditions.
    "no plan survives intact upon contact with the enemy" - wisdom of the Grunts.

  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fork Union, Virginia
    Posts
    2,691
    I've seen a lot of the articles by Mike Vanderboegh......he seems to be pretty good at articulating what is happening & where we are heading.

    Raider39a, I hope you are correct about it not being tolerated here.......but, they way things are progressing, I'm not so sure. Incrementalism is alive & well. Our rights are being slowly absconded with in the name of safety or other things like: 'it's for the children'.

    I am on the other hand, heartened by the push from our side lately. There seems to have been a recent push for gun rights in the last few months......more so than any other time in recent history.
    Last edited by goawayfarm; May 5th, 2007 at 11:57 AM.
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.-Seneca

    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. If I have a gun, what do I have to be paranoid about?" -Clint Smith

    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper

  10. #9
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,129
    PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

    Yeah Great.
    Absolutely fantastic topic.
    Probably the wrong Internet forum for discussing it all though.

    Please take note that CombatCarry.com is a forum with a primary focus.

    We are a forum predominately dedicated to topics of legal concealed firearm carry.

    Just FYI - We exist on the Internet to answer the really tough questions centered around legally licensed firearm carry for the purposes of personal self protection.

    We never were founded or created to answer to answer the Really Tough Questions of Civil Rebellion in the New World Order.

    We are not an Internet forum composed of all like minded Gun Toting pre-next-revolutionary American Soldiers Of The Next Revolution.

    That would be well out of the scope of this forum.

    That never has been why we are here.

    That is not why the vast majority of our member base joined us here.

    CombatCarry is not a general all encompassing political firearm preparedness forum for the big forthcoming big insurrection.
    That is not why we are here.

    We are here to fill the void that exists in obtaining the most valuable and correct information concerning suitable firearms for personal self defense - holsters related to carry - defensive ammunition as related to personal defense carry.

    Common sense dictates what forum topics closely relate to our main purpose and goal of filling that idiosyncratic void.

    I am posting this here now so that all may understand in advance why this thread might not be here.

    If it goes it will not be because it's not a valid topic of discussion.
    It will not be because we are AFRAID (like children) to entertain "certain" thoughts and answer those Really Tough Questions.

    It will be because you selected the wrong Internet forum to present it all in.

    There already are about 10,000 other forums on the Net that are focused solely around the content of this thread post.

    All American citizens can still freely visit those Tough Question sites to learn exactly how to best slit the throats and silently garrote the New Red, White, & Blue Nazi military gun confiscators while they sleep.

    They would be the ideal places for you to visit to get those Really Tough questions answered.

    Please also keep Forum Rule #8 on the forefront of your thoughts and your keyboard when you post comments in this thread. Every member agreed to abide by those rules in order to join us here.

    Rule #8
    Discussion of illegal activities (for the purpose of promoting these activities) are not allowed whether they pertain to on or off topic subjects. Anyone in this category will be banned immediately. Banned posters may, under certain circumstances have their posts removed. If you quote or reference these posts in your own, they may also be removed.
    Last edited by QKShooter; May 5th, 2007 at 12:30 PM.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  11. #10
    Member Array ptmmatssc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    159
    Just FYI - We exist on the Internet to answer the really tough questions centered around legally licensed firearm carry for the purposes of personal self protection.
    So I guess the following should be removed :

    Off Topic & Humor Discussions
    Law Enforcement, Homeland Security & Military Discussion
    Second Amendment News & Discussions

    Funny , there are other threads that have nothing to do with concealed carry or personal defense etc . like these :

    http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin...ad.php?t=24793
    http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin...ad.php?t=19576

    And why "combatcarry" and not "defensivecarry"?

    Not trying to stir the pot , but to tell the truth , I didn't see anyone post anything about doing something "illegal" . Discussion about gun rights or lack thereof is legitimate to this forum since without any "rights" there would be no forum . Personal defense involves more than just a typical mugger or burglar , it includes anyone wishing to do you and yours harm , and that includes the people that "govern" .

    Just my .02 .

  12. #11
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    15,850
    Please re read QKshooter's post carefully. It cannot be stated any better than he has already done.
    "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson


    Nemo Me Impune Lacesset

  13. #12
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,129

    Thumbs up

    > The thread that you have provided a link to has had posted comments edited out of it.

    > Please don't be concerned about not wanting to stir the pot.
    Trust me you'll be stirring the pot in some other kitchen rather than stirring it here.

    > Just FYI the original name for the forum was intended to be ConcealedCarry.com but the name was already taken by Concealed Carry Clothiers.

    > Bumper will change the name to DefensiveCarry.com whenever he decides to do it.
    I can't give you a more truthful answer than that nor do I owe you one.

    > Please also read Rule #7

    We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of certain subjects (politics, abortion, sexual orientation, etc) often degenerate quickly.
    For this reason, we do not focus on these subjects in our discussions.
    We encourage you to take these discussions to other forums where these topics are the focus.
    We do not allow posts that violate CombatCarry.com's "reasonable" community standards.

    The forum Administrator and Moderators shall make the final decision on what does/does not violate community standards.

    Just FYI ~
    Congress has passed no law limiting the number of Internet forums that any citizen with Internet access may join.
    You can feel free to participate in countless numbers of Internet forums directly related to the topic of this thread and then just come back here for your concealed carry information.
    That is fine & many of our members do that.
    Or you may ultimately decide that this forum in not for you and you cannot stay here because there are things that are on your mind and you can't vent them or talk about them here.
    That is fine with us also.
    It's your call but, naturally we hope that you'll stay.

    We are a forum located in America but, please understand that there is no "Free Speech" here.
    There is Conditional Free Speech here...speech that stays within the confines of of our main forum objective.
    It is must be polite and respectful to other forum members and the topics of discussion that are permitted are at the sole digression of the moderators and the administrators. Bumper having the ultimate call since he pays the monthly bill out of his own pocket.

    That is what you clicked "I Agree" to when you joined CombatCarry.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  14. #13
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Sorry I started a fight. I was just posting up info not implying we should overthrow the government.

    I found the article as absurd as the article that they were rebutting, which is why I posted it.

    Sorry guys.

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Well it was a good read, seems only fair that if the first article was posted this one should be as a rebuttal. However in this case best to ere on the side of caution with the comments about it.

    QKshooter is right in that the focus of this forum is not congruent to the primary subject of the article.

    Perhaps a solution would be to merge this thread with the one involving the first article and then lock it down so no more posting can be done? That way the information does not dissapear here people still have the option of following the links provided previously in both places, but no new info may be added as well. It will just fade away into the dark places of the other dead threads. Harmless to all parties involved.

    Just an idea really, not attempting to tell the administration how to do their job. So sorry if i have stepped on some toes.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  16. #15
    DC Founder
    Array Bumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    20,045
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Sorry I started a fight. I was just posting up info not implying we should overthrow the government.

    I found the article as absurd as the article that they were rebutting, which is why I posted it.

    Sorry guys.
    You didn't start a fight as you are not responsible for the reaction of another member to a warning about the rules.

    The topic (gun control) could be considered on topic for this forum, but the quoted post breaches the rules regarding not discussing or encouraging illegal activity. That particular rule is not so much meant to protect us (the forum) as it is our members who, fairly often, put themselves in jeapordy talking about something illegal they did or plan on doing. And killing police would be considered illegal.

    What any of us do if this actual scenario were to play out should be kept out of public forum, IMHO. Believe me, I would not make it easy on anyone coming for my guns, but telling you that I'm going to start shooting in a public forum when they appear gives the gungrabbers ammunition to make their case that we are dangerous and should be disarmed, regardless of whether it's legitimate or not.

    All that being said, I don't believe this scenario is realistic. If they do, in the end, make a move to disarm gun owners it will be incrementally and much more subtle than the scenario presented by this old washed up beauracratic ambassador....
    Bumper
    Coimhéad fearg fhear na foighde; Beware the anger of a patient man.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Toledo Blade Editorial against Resturant Carry
    By elad in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: March 27th, 2010, 08:19 PM
  2. Here Is Follow Up Article To Store Owner Kills Two...
    By GoldenSaber in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: August 16th, 2009, 10:22 AM
  3. Toledo Blade Editoral
    By Bob66 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 29th, 2008, 08:12 AM
  4. The "other" breed of firearm owner...ugh.
    By C9H13NO3 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: December 18th, 2007, 03:29 PM

Search tags for this page

daniel h. simpson the disarming of america the toledo blade, wednesday, april 25, 2007

,

daniel h. simpson the toledo blade

,

daniel h. simpson toldedo blade

,

daniel h. simpson toledo blade editorial

,

the toledo blade. firearms

Click on a term to search for related topics.