Militia movement's heroes will be packing heat at rally on the Potomac - Page 2

Militia movement's heroes will be packing heat at rally on the Potomac

This is a discussion on Militia movement's heroes will be packing heat at rally on the Potomac within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; You generalize and make broad statements that make it impossible to counter argue. There are plenty of politicians who are actively working to make this ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: Militia movement's heroes will be packing heat at rally on the Potomac

  1. #16
    Member Array LeChuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    153
    You generalize and make broad statements that make it impossible to counter argue. There are plenty of politicians who are actively working to make this country a better place. True, some of them are scum just like you'll find in any profession (Retail worker, cops, school teacher, you'll find scum in with any profession). This does not mean we advocate throwing bricks through the window of people who've done nothing more than subscribe to the Democratic party.

    When, and if they actually come for me, that is when I will bear arms. Until then I owe it to this country, the people and myself to give the process a chance. We have been in rough spots before and come out, you seem to forget that four years in the grand scheme of thing is irrelevant.


  2. #17
    Senior Member Array digitalexplr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Jefferson City, MO
    Posts
    914
    One of the oppositions main tactics is to infiltrate our ranks, do and say stupid stuff so that we get blamed.

    Some on our side make this really easy to do.
    NRA Life Member

  3. #18
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    I'm not a proponent of bloodshed, but I can't blindly advocate following the "rules" especially when those rules are authored by these criminals. My point is that the only thing these people have to fear is moving from Congress into a very well-paying job. And I don't doubt that the ratio of scum-to-virtuous within the House and Senate is far above any supposed "national average" for other jobs. And if you're waiting until "they come" for you, you're in for a fast and lonely take-down.

    Please, someone tell me, where EXACTLY is the incentive for an elected rep to act responsibly and in good conscience? Or at the very least NOT engage in behavior that is detrimental to our country?
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array paaiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Wrong. Our constitution does not command us to do what you are afraid to actually say in words--- and so you dance around the notion of rebellion with the use of a grandiose metaphor full of cryptic meaning: "abolish malignant growth that has invaded our sacred republic," and by so stating, you hope to incite others to do the illegal things you yourself won't do. And should not do, and must not do!

    You are no patriot sir.

    It is our duty to uphold our constitution by obeying the law, by voting, and by serving on juries. It is our individual option to do our one three hundred millionths of the chore of running this country by going to school, going to work, and if we so choose, running for elective office.

    There is no right to rebellion, anymore than there is a right to murder. Think about that.

    glockman10mm said this well: "As a gun ownership community, it is time that we seperate ourselves from the overzealous radicals who claim to be patriots and use their twisted and ignorant views of history to make us all look like idiots"
    While I'm in no way proposing violent rebellion, I would like to pose you this question. What happens if/when that stops working? What happens if our rights are slowly snuffed out one at a time?

    I'm not predicting the end of the world here, just wondering what you propose we do when the powers that be stop caring about what they are and aren't allowed to do, and they start removing our rights? Again, not saying it'll happen and it is unlikely, but what happens if Obama - or any other future president for that matter - decides to impose martial law and Congress doesn't stop him?

    Do you really think the second amendment was meant to protect us from common criminals?

    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.
    The Constitution doesn't say we should throw off an oppressive government because that's not the point of the Constitution. The Constitution is a document that lays out how the government should work, its powers and responsibilities, what it can and can't do. The Declaration of Independence is a much more philosophical document dealing less with how government should work, and more what people should expect of their government, and how those people should react when that government oversteps its bounds too much.

    Of course the Constitution doesn't say people have the right to rebel. That right was understood as one of the most basic human rights. The Constitution doesn't enumerate that right because it was already done in the Declaration. The Constitution does, however, attempt to secure and preserve the rights necessary to facilitate such rebellion should it ever become necessary. The right to freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right of the people to be secure in their property...
    Last edited by paaiyan; April 19th, 2010 at 07:57 PM. Reason: Adding content
    My blog

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

  5. #20
    Member Array LeChuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by jumpwing View Post
    I'm not a proponent of bloodshed, but I can't blindly advocate following the "rules" especially when those rules are authored by these criminals. My point is that the only thing these people have to fear is moving from Congress into a very well-paying job. And I don't doubt that the ratio of scum-to-virtuous within the House and Senate is far above any supposed "national average" for other jobs. And if you're waiting until "they come" for you, you're in for a fast and lonely take-down.

    Please, someone tell me, where EXACTLY is the incentive for an elected rep to act responsibly and in good conscience? Or at the very least NOT engage in behavior that is detrimental to our country?
    Where is the incentive for me not to rape, murder or steal? I hate to say it, but it wouldn't be all that difficult to get away with if you put a little foresight into it. I don't do these things not because I'm afraid of getting caught, but because I am a mostly decent person (admittedly, I am not perfect, but I can say I've never killed, raped or stolen *discounting a couple packs of smokes when I was 12, and yes I feel guilty*).

    The issue is that people are for the most part ignorant, they'll believe whatever agenda fits their outlook on the world. And they will elect people that fit their bill, and sadly they do not take the time to look up who these people really are and simply believe whatever election commercial is currently playing on television.

  6. #21
    Distinguished Member Array GunGeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,249
    If you still think congress and the POTUS thinks they derive their powers from the consent of the governed, that they even care about the consent of the governed, and that the government hasn't become destructive because of the massive debt it is passing on to your children and your childrens' children then you sir are no patriot either. You are an ostrich or to put it bluntly, you have rectal vision. It is because a majority of sheeple continue to vote to maintain the status quo that things have been allowed to go this far. Voting and continuing to vote for a losing cause is not patriotism, it's just plain stupid!

  7. #22
    Member Array LeChuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    153
    No offense, but if complaining about the way things are on a message board is considered patriotic, I'll continue to be a sheep.

    There are other options out there. Continuously voting in corrupt politicians, or blowing up federal buildings are not the only options available to us. If you think otherwise I'd suggest getting your vision corrected, because you are seeing nothing but red.

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,391
    Quote Originally Posted by GunGeezer View Post
    If you still think congress and the POTUS thinks they derive their powers from the consent of the governed, that they even care about the consent of the governed, and that the government hasn't become destructive because of the massive debt it is passing on to your children and your childrens' children then you sir are no patriot either. You are an ostrich or to put it bluntly, you have rectal vision. It is because a majority of sheeple continue to vote to maintain the status quo that things have been allowed to go this far. Voting and continuing to vote for a losing cause is not patriotism, it's just plain stupid!
    So, what is your options? Will you abandon the law abiding citizens of this country and call to arms those willing to listen to your call? Will you stop voting and paying taxes? Will you continue to beat the drum of dissention and despair while true patriots march forward with their voices and grassroots efforts to advance freedom in a way prescribed by the constitution? Sir, I submit to you that you have a right to feel frustrated with the political process. But it is what we have and it is the best in the world. To say that someone is an ostrich or has rectal vision is an insult that shows you you are in a state of emotional and reckless abandonment, not given to rational thought but driven by a perception that all is lost. You are in a minority, thank God. We are nowhere near a situation as dire as you have imagined, but it would behoove you to think of and encourage a more constructive way to contribute to the process. Hopyard, I am with you, did not mean to jump in there, but I could'nt help myself. You speak with wisdom that only time and experience can bring.

  9. #24
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,914

    re: paaiyan

    Quote Originally Posted by paaiyan View Post
    While I'm in no way proposing violent rebellion, I would like to pose you this question. What happens if/when that stops working? What happens if our rights are slowly snuffed out one at a time?
    Long before "it stops working" either Congress or the States will alter The Constitution so that it does work.

    We are nowhere near the sort of situation where the type of illegal activities being advocated by a few in these forums, against forum rules btw, could possibly be justified in any way whatsoever.

    I'm not predicting the end of the world here, just wondering what you propose we do when the powers that be stop caring about what they are and aren't allowed to do, and they start removing our rights?
    The governors have all the power they need to convene a constitutional convention and change things. The Senate has all the power it needs to change things. The Courts have all the power they need to rebuke the other two. When that system breaks down, then maybe there is something to discuss. We aren't there. We are nowhere near being there.

    I think too many assume that their particular viewpoint (whatever it is) is somehow representative of society at large, and that if their view isn't the one which actually prevails, they should scream that their rights are being violated sufficient to justify murder---yes, I used the word murder, because that is what is required in a rebellion; and it is what some on TV are presently hinting at and inciting other to accomplish.

    At the present things are working exactly as the founders intended, even if individually some of us vehemently dislike some aspects or some of the results. Old saying, "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater."

    (We could fly off on 200 pages of debate here if I mention one name-- John Brown, villain or hero?" Let's leave that for another time.)

    Again, not saying it'll happen and it is unlikely, but what happens if Obama - or any other future president for that matter - decides to impose martial law and Congress doesn't stop him?

    The question is filled with a double what if. You are speaking of the exceedingly improbable. What if my grandmother had....

    Again, we have fifty state governors with fifty state National Guard "militias" and I suppose if the governors called a Constitutional Convention and were jailed --- then there is something to talk about. We aren't anywhere near that situation now, are we?

    Do you really think the second amendment was meant to protect us from common criminals?
    I do not think the framers of our Constitution intended to provide for rebellion because they envisioned a republican form of representative government in which the political power belonged to the electorate. Therefore, what you are suggesting would not make sense as a motive for 2a.

    As for rebellions, I think we know very well what our founders thought about rebellion and did about it. And it is not what we were taught in elementary school-- where the Whiskey Rebellion was seldom mentioned, pr soon forgotten by kids like myself as having no bearing on our lives.

    From Wikipedia
    "The Whiskey Rebellion, less commonly known as the Whiskey Insurrection, was a resistance movement in the western frontier of the United States in the 1790s, during the presidency of George Washington. George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, remembering Shays' Rebellion eight years before, decided to make Pennsylvania a testing ground for federal authority. Washington ordered federal marshals to serve court orders requiring the tax protesters to appear in federal district court. Washington invoked the Militia Law of 1792 to federalize the militias of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and New Jersey... This marked the first time under the new United States Constitution that the federal government used military force to exert authority over the nation's citizens. It was also the only time that a sitting President personally commanded the military in the field."

    In other words, Washington himself did not believe there was a right to rebellion against the government of the US. And he personally fought against it.

    Thus, even at the very start of our nation's history, the government protected itself from armed rebellion using the full weight of the military--in this case the lawful Federalized state militias. That is, the military entities which we today call The National Guard.

    I want to note, we don't celebrate the Whiskey Rebellion's leaders as heroes, and most folks don't even know their names. We do remember and revere George Washington.

    Going back to your example in this post---an unlawful martial law unilaterally proclaimed by a sitting president:

    Why assume the most dire scenario you can possibly think of and pose that as somehow comparable to today's very ordinary differences of opinion amongst the electorate?

    The Constitution doesn't say we should throw off an oppressive government because that's not the point of the Constitution.
    Wrong! It doesn't say that because under The Constitution the government by definition can not be oppressive.

    Of course the Constitution doesn't say people have the right to rebel. That right was understood as one of the most basic human rights.
    Quite clearly if you think about the US Government's response to the Shay and Whiskey Rebellions, you will see that what you are asserting is not what the founders themselves actually thought--- except of course when they were writing a letter to a certain King.

    So, for the benefit of all the so called "originalists " who lurk here, and who have somehow convinced themselves that THE FOUNDERS THEMSELVES provided for rebellion with 2A, I think the putting down of the Whiskey Rebellion is the best example from history of what the founders actually thought.

  10. #25
    Distinguished Member Array Colin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    1,863
    As a Canadian I thought the language used by the paper was over the top. What I do notice is that the MSM don't report is just how many protests, tea party's and OC events have happened with people who have been armed and no gun related issues occured? They don't want to talk about it I think because there are lot of "armed gatherings" where nothing much happens and the MSM hates that.

  11. #26
    VIP Member
    Array ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley in Virginia
    Posts
    2,490

    Fact check

    Quote Originally Posted by LeChuck View Post
    Well all the way down by Mount Vernon is technically Washington D.C waters. Though I am factoring in having to drive there, and not as the crow flies. Maybe it isn't all that far.
    That would be news to the folks living in the Northern Neck. Check your facts please, the river down by Mount Vernon is not Washington, D.C. waters. The southern DC water boundary terminates at Jones Point near I-95.

  12. #27
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    I live less than a mile from Gravelly Point (for the moment). If the Potomac is 15 miles wide at that point, I'm a monkey's uncle...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  13. #28
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    Quote Originally Posted by LeChuck View Post
    Where is the incentive for me not to rape, murder or steal? I hate to say it, but it wouldn't be all that difficult to get away with if you put a little foresight into it.
    But that's the problem. These people DO get caught and NOTHING happens.

    This lack of accountability is the twist in my panties.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  14. #29
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,914

    re: Jumpwing --???

    Quote Originally Posted by jumpwing View Post
    But that's the problem. These people DO get caught and NOTHING happens.

    This lack of accountability is the twist in my panties.
    I'm not sure what you really mean by this. There are quite a few former Congress Critters who either are in jail, or have served jail time. They do get caught and they do get prosecuted. Just a couple: Jefferson of the money in the freezer scandal; "Beam me down Scotty" of Ohio, I can't remember the goof's name but he got 8 years in the Federal Big House; former Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Dan Rostenkoskie (Sp?); I think there is one recently jailed from California. They do get caught and they do get punished.

    There are many former captains of industry and wall street who are in jail too. No doubt not enough, but you can't really assert that "nothing happens to them."

    Those BGs in public life who don't make it all the way to a cell are publicly humiliated by opinion writers and talking heads. Some of the "harder" ones don't really care that they are the butt end of jokes and ridicule, but these bad eggs almost always eventually cross a line and go to jail. Sometimes it takes a "special prosecutor" to get the job done, and sometimes these guys miss the mark, you can bet that anyone under the microscope of a prosecutor is not thinking nothing will happen to them. At a minimum they will face financial ruination defending themselves.

    In relatively recent history and certainly my memory, one former President was forced from office while another was both humiliated and disbared from the practice of law. A Vice President of the US was forced from office and sent to jail (Agnew). Now and again, a judge will be impeached and prosecuted. Governors have been sent to jail too, as have many lesser figures in the various state legislatures, judicial positions, and prosecutor's offices.

    Earlier you asked: "Please, someone tell me, where EXACTLY is the incentive for an elected rep to act responsibly and in good conscience?" I can't address the incentive, though I think it is the natural human tendency toward altruism and attaining a common good is what motivates. The disincentive to misbehaving is the threat of jail time.


    Things don't always work fast, perfectly, cleanly, but do keep in mind that a difference in opinion on a policy matter doesn't make the other person a criminal. I think that is the error too many make. They take the position that ordinary disagreements are sufficient to call the other side's position criminal, or unconstitutional, or "communistic" or "fascistic."

    If we can remember that we are all friends and family we'd all be a great deal better off.

    Nothing going on here in the US is sufficiently out of the ordinary of our history to justify the sort of dire acts many quietly wish would happen and a few publicly hint at. For those who think that way, history has a few good lessons--starting with The Whiskey Rebellion; repeated with John Brown (whose cause was just), and continuing into our century with various anarchist groups, communist groups, black-liberation groups such as the Symbianese Liberation Army, and many many other misguided groups who preferred violence to the ballot.

    Our Constitution gives those in power the full authority needed to protect constitutional governance, and private militia groups are outside of the constitutional plan for checks and balances; notwithstanding their own misguided thinking on the matter.

  15. #30
    Member Array Holger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by LeChuck View Post
    This does not mean we advocate throwing bricks through the window of people who've done nothing more than subscribe to the Democratic party.
    .
    I agree. But let's not overlook the fact the preponderance (by a wide margin) of the ACTUAL political violence happening in this country is being perpetrated by supporters of the Democratic Party.

    Ken Gladney gets beaten by SEIU thugs
    Bobby Jindal's aide gets beaten (viciously!) by lefty protestors
    Someone, a Democratic donor, shoots (!) a bullet into Eric Cantor's office
    Leftist professor guns down coworkers in Alabama
    Pro-Obama protestor bites off finger of innocent bystander at townhall meeting

    The list goes on and on. Sure, some protestors bring guns to rallies, thereby scaring the wits out of liberals. Any violence? Nope. All this 12-step, introspective, aging hippy BS talk of scary people railing against the government and needing to be stopped is simply ridiculous. Most of these people can't remember THEIR behavior from 2000-08, much less their antics in the 60s.

    Dissent used to be patriotic. Now that the anti-establishmentarians of the past 40 years ARE the establishment, the whole 1st Amendment thing is scary as all get out and the rebel scum must be stopped.

    Is Obama going to destroy this country? He** no. He's not capable enough or smart enough to do so. Are some of the Tea Party protestors overreacting? Likely. But this sudden attack of the vapors the American Left is getting over a few protests aimed at them is disengenous, immature, weak, pathetic, comedic, and induces in me nothing but contempt. Get over yourselves, put on your big boy underwear, and deal with the consequences of your votes.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Sponsored 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. US Militia Movement
    By Tombstone55 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: August 19th, 2009, 01:49 PM
  2. Marines Packing Heat.
    By JD in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: July 24th, 2008, 05:04 PM
  3. Mama's packing heat!
    By bluedaisy in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: February 5th, 2008, 06:59 PM
  4. Cooking With Heat: Packing Heat While You BBQ Your Meat
    By juking in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: January 18th, 2008, 10:43 PM
  5. Packing Heat - No Apologies
    By ronwill in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: October 23rd, 2007, 07:48 PM