Obama to go for guns in 2013 'there will be resistance'

[Bark'n]

The 2nd amendment allows for a militia for the protection of freedom. I do not see anything unlawful in following the constitution and protecting it. I do not expect it to come to that but that is our right if the government tries to overturn the Constitution. That is why I said if all else fails. I fully expect the courts settle it. There is not a lawful reason at this point to call for armed resistance. But if the government falls into tyranny then who decides what is lawful? Do we follow the laws of the Constitution or of the government? Perhaps we disagree on which holds the authority and consent of the people.

Good post. I agree 100%.

I believe legislatures are working on this on the state level. Some states are taking the lead. They are slowly passing laws which further protect gun rights, and doing things which the Federal Government generally disagree. Such as Michigan and others passing laws which allow for concealed carry in schools by teachers, and other faculty and staff.

Several states took action after the gun confiscation which took place after Katrina. Missouri was one of them which passed a bill which would prevent gun confiscation during periods of "declared emergencies."

I think we are a long way away from an armed response by a "citizen militia." Many states are slowly working on these issues.

We must continue to be active in our state government. Our state government is our first line of defense, and our strongest defense. We must continue to elect Governors and state legislatures which will fight to protect the US Constitution, and ensure our State Constitutions are strong and with purpose.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[HDusmc]

Your freedom does not come from any government or "king". It comes from your creator. Whether you call him Allah, God, Budah or what have you. The belief that everything you have is owed to the government or somehow your good fortune should be attributed to the government is false. That is the point here. Every culture believes in some type of higher power, and from that higher power are they made "free people". Ever hear of free will?

^^^^^^^What he said exacally

[Hopyard]

Hop - let's examine the what ifs here - there are three.

1. Changing out Kennedy or one of the conservative justices - this is reasonably likely given the ages of Kennedy and Scalia. It is not a given, but not unreasonable to consider. We have seen the quality of the justices that O puts on the court and there is no reason to doubt the next will be a Sotomayer/Kagan clone.

2. O declares that all must turn in weapons - true O has not gone past guns, but this is his stated objective towards guns. He has stated it from his earliest positions in politics and recently. I have no doubt that, if he could, he would make such a decree. If he aligns the court, I think he will make that play.

3. If #1 is completed, there is absolutely no reason to expect that SCOTUS would do anything other than what Kagan and Sotomayer are both on record as saying they would do.

These were not some far fetched what ifs, these are very much realistic and possible, if not probable, questions to ponder.

Re:Part in bold. How would that occur? He lacks any such authority. Congress would have to act.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't, maybe it will come down somewhere in the middle. As for what justices might
do, one never knows. One day Suter (retired Justice) surprises, another day Roberts surprises, another day
someone else surprises. But if we believe in our constitution, the SC is the only institution with the authority
to make a final determination of legality and constitutionality, and once they have spoken there is nothing much to be done
unless one is foolish enough to think they are John Brown; and we all know what happened to John Brown.

[Darrow75]

The belief that everything you have is owed to the government or somehow your good fortune should be attributed to the government is false.

I don't recall ever saying that.

Every culture believes in some type of higher power, and from that higher power are they made "free people". Ever hear of free will?

And my rights as a free person are to be dictated who's higher power? Yours...no questions asked? No thanks. That is not freedom.

[Darrow75]

My "dislike" button is missing again...

Anyone else having the same problem???

Yep. Can't find mine either.

[HDusmc]

And my rights as a free person are to be dictated who's higher power? Yours...no questions asked? No thanks. That is not freedom.

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.
THOMAS JEFFERSON,*Declaration of Independence

[cmdrdredd]

I don't recall ever saying that.

And my rights as a free person are to be dictated who's higher power? Yours...no questions asked? No thanks. That is not freedom.

Do you need a reading lesson?

"Every culture believes in some type of higher power, and from that higher power are they made "free people". Ever hear of free will?"

You are picking only a part of what is said and twisting the words because you have some ridiculous sense of oppression. Get over that and then we can have a conversation. The fact that you are trying to play the victim and make it out to seem that every religion is some how holding a boot to your throat is quite a strange way of thinking.

It doesn't matter what God you think is right. No government in the history of mankind has ever endowed the right to be a free thinker. They can't because that is a natural part of what it means to be human. When you are made, you are made to think for yourself.

[d2jlking]

I'm afraid several of you missed the main point and misconstrued what I wrote. So,let me try again.

Of course the men who turned out were bearing personally owned firearms. That is indisputable. The point I was making
is that the decision to have a Revolution against England was a political decision made by the lawful authorities of the various colonies and their representatives sent to Philadelphia. The decision was not made by the people as individuals.

Government was at work, and government organized the rebellion by raising money, obtaining munitions, arranging for the manufacture of such of arms and ships, floating a Navy of sorts, arranging
alliances with France, using diplomacy with the Spaniards.

The American Revolutionary war was quite a different affair from the chaotic anarchistic stuff you see now in Syria, it was organized by government and commanded top down by General Washington on instructions from a Continental Congress.

Structurally, all those guns in the hands of the hands of private soldiers and in the hands of privateers were under the control of the central government-- the Continental Congress.

The same occurred for the Civil War. Rebellion was not a bottom up thing. It was top down, led by the state
governments.

Many who post here seem to have a fanciful notion that our government is "out of control" and that we need
a bottom up revolution. That is insanity. It would not work. It is impractical, illegal, and speaking of it is the very
antithesis of adhering to whatever oath you may have taken (and most of us have) to preserve, protect, and defend,
the constitution of the United States.

This is not accurate. Yes the rebellion was "run" by the government but t was started by citizens. Angry citizens who banded together to protest, sometimes forcibly and illegally, a government who taxed and restricted the people without fair representation. Certainly, there were many people during that time who felt revolt was a mistake, unjust and illegal. However, it was indeed armed revolt. The "government and military formed en masse AFTER the people made it clear (often thru protest and even violent acts) that they would support such a rebellion.

[CharlesMorri]

As far as how we will know when it's time to "marshal the troops" I would think that gun confiscation would be one hell of a cue, don't you?

Fear the government that fears your guns!

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1356981428.493545.jpg

Damn proud of it too! ^^^^^

[kerberos]

Yep. Can't find mine either.

Touche...

[Hopyard]

That's the amazing beauty, and largest weakness, of what makes our country the greatest nation in the free world. We are afforded the right to speak out against whatever we choose. Hop loves to exercise his First Amendment right and uses it to downplay the importance of our Second Amendment right. He has this right without qualification, so even though he is historically inaccurate and bases most of what he says on nothing more than supposition (or propaganda), it remains his right to say. I say it's a weakness because being free to speak out against the very things that keep you free, exposes the dichotomy that must exist for a truly free people to remain so. Censorship of "dangerous" ideas is always the last thing to fall, which then turns a free people into an oppressed people.

Thankfully there have always been men, and women, that have chosen the a much more difficult path; and that path is the one that protects his rights, irregardless of how he feels about their sacrifice or the measures by which they achieved the rights he enjoys today.

Re: Only to part in bold. TX Expat, in the next few hours or days I'll post Hopyard's recent reading list in the Off Topic
and Humor forum. I've shared some of it privately with R&G who has some interest in the same reading material.

I think you will realize on seeing that list that what I say is far from propaganda or supposition, but
is solidly based on extensive readings, some of it the autobiographical material of the founders. Happy New Year.

[oakchas]

Well.

So the nation is split. About 50/50 on guns both in ownership and control. some of the owners of guns believe in some more controls... Some who have no guns do not believe there should be any controls.. so it works out... about 50/50, still.

The revolutionary war pitted brother against brother. The first civil war pitted brother against brother. The next civil war... if it comes... over guns? or the fiscal cliff or whatever, or all of the above... Will pit brother against brother...

Who wins?

Hint:

Follow the money. And there will be money for BOTH sides... at interest... from the same people... While they watch us, in our little ... I dunno... cage match?

Insurrections ... from the Whiskey rebellion, to the Civil War... have been put down... by the Government of the United States... with money from the moneylenders...

If we should see a civil war over the gun issue, or any other... it will take us decades or more to recover... And we will borrow money to do that, too...

Are we headed to civil war? are we going to do so over guns? possibly.

I have no fear of it. why?

Because when the m16s are locked, loaded, and aimed at your head, you will take them to the safe, just like they did in Katrina... And they will start with the most voiciferous.

If it starts to happen, much will be accomplished before the rest of us hear a word about it. And, I believe it will be a "done deal" before an effective resistance can be mounted.

Our best bet, at this point, IMHumbleO, is to petition for a redress of grievances. Before they become grievances.

But where are the advertisements that explain our side? The antis, being congresscritters and POTUS... will get all the air time they want for FREE... We have to buy ours... and we ain't doin' it... And if you think it doesn't matter, look at how elections are won...

They are won on TV and on the Radio, and in the press... And we are allowing ourselves to be painted as "clingers" "rednecks" "wannabe Rambos" etc. etc.

We need more Suzanna Gratia Hupps on TV telling us that we cannot be made defenseless... that the second amendment is important... That our liberties are at stake... and we need good spokesmodels to do the talking... But, we will have to buy our time in front of the camera... that I can assure you.

And nobody (the NRA, the GOA, the SAF), none of 'em seems to know this... all they do is preach to the choir (us) and while we are NOT a minority... most of us here (based on posts) won't even bother with a discussion with an anti... because they're "so illogical."


If we don't enter into dialogue, in front of and to the masses, and the individuals... WE WILL LOSE this fight.

[HDusmc]

Re: Only to part in bold. TX Expat, in the next few hours or days I'll post Hopyard's recent reading list in the Off Topic
and Humor forum. I've shared some of it privately with R&G who has some interest in the same reading material.

I think you will realize on seeing that list that what I say is far from propaganda or supposition, but
is solidly based on extensive readings, some of it the autobiographical material of the founders. Happy New Year.

Based on your posts, I think you should add the Constitution to your reading list.

[kerberos]

Re: Only to part in bold. TX Expat, in the next few hours or days I'll post Hopyard's recent reading list in the Off Topic
and Humor forum. I've shared some of it privately with R&G who has some interest in the same reading material.

I think you will realize on seeing that list that what I say is far from propaganda or supposition, but
is solidly based on extensive readings, some of it the autobiographical material of the founders. Happy New Year.

Absolutely...

The debate/argument being presented on this thread is VERY similar to other's that took place before the founding of our nation.

What was old shall become new again I guess...

Are you referring to Patrick Henry, James Monroe, Samuel Adams, and others Hopyard???

I'm a little torn as I can see both sides of this debate clearly...

That the one side can't seem to even comprehend the other is what's baffling me.

[Darrow75]

Do you need a reading lesson?

"Every culture believes in some type of higher power, and from that higher power are they made "free people". Ever hear of free will?"

You are picking only a part of what is said and twisting the words because you have some ridiculous sense of oppression. Get over that and then we can have a conversation. The fact that you are trying to play the victim and make it out to seem that every religion is some how holding a boot to your throat is quite a strange way of thinking.

It doesn't matter what God you think is right. No government in the history of mankind has ever endowed the right to be a free thinker. They can't because that is a natural part of what it means to be human. When you are made, you are made to think for yourself.

That's funny. I do not have any ridiculous sense of oppression. I simply made a statement because when someone claims that if I don't have God I am not free and therefore some sort of Marxist, Commie...I will take exception with that. You have every right to believe in whichever god you want to believe...same as I am. I have no issues with God. It's just that when the idea of God gets intertwined with government, it has a knack for turning into religion, and religion is an interpretation by man. And that, I have many issues with.