Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2013 10:29:52 GMT -7
+1...that's what I got from it, as well. I guess I’m reading a different article than some here. I see nothing about LEOs. Here is a quote from the article than mentions “any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty”. Is that what some are seeing as LEOs? Really? Seems to me then the NG, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, Homeland Security would be included in that statement too. Mr. Garrison also says this is strictly a self-defense situation. How does one get from the blog “does that mean it's legal for me buy a RPG in Mexico and then walk down Main Street USA with it slung on my back? That's bearing arms right? And when the cop tries to arrest me, it's cool if I shoot him in the face right? That's what I read there..... “ ? Where does it say the author has some “sick cop killing fantasy with his constitutional chest beating”  Those statements sound like paranoia to me. Quoting Dean Garrison “If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.” The man has strictly written about if they COME to take your guns. Not if you’re walking down the street with an obvious illegal weapon of mass destruction. I also see nothing in the blog, what so ever about the right to bear arms, in the form of weapons of mass destruction. Which, is defined here; www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/04/definition_of_w.htmlMr. Garrison went to great links at times to make sure one would read this as a SELF DEFENSE article about the government coming to your doorstep to take your guns. Nothing about out on the streets, nothing about any sort of particular weapon, nothing about obtaining illegal weapons. Just self-defense of ones constitutionally rights. Yes he did say you have the right to put them 6 feet under, IF they come for your constitutionally protected LIBERTY!!! If one wants to inflect the way they read it, fine. But to make the man a troll? And accuse him of being a bad boy? If we get to the point of gun confiscation we better hope there are a lot of bad boys out ther. If constitutional chest beating is some sort of wrong thinking, guess I’m as wrong as it gets. This mans blog is as black and white as the constitution is. Jimmy |
|
|
|
Post by missasip on Jan 10, 2013 11:11:33 GMT -7
Just gather all the gun owners and tell them to arrest you. There is no way the government can process 100 million gun owners. Nor can they feed you or house you or even provide you with one prison jumpsuit. The prisons are already releasing inmates as quickly as they can because of prison overcrowding and to reduce costs.. (while this sounds good, I'm not going to surrender or go to prison.. I'm just advocating a different thought pattern).... but this is another way of forcing the government's hand. Quite honestly I think someone should offer that as an option to Biden right now before any laws are passed and see how they answer these logistical questions.. +1 I agree that there is no way they will come for our guns. The government is big, but they just don't have the logistics for it. Of course I actually think BO is using the murder of all those kids as a way of taking some light off the debt issues... Jimmy |
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Jan 10, 2013 12:23:02 GMT -7
I've never seen (well at least recently) politicians keen over the death of children before as much as they are with this.. There has been virtually nothing about any of the other reasons this happened. They throw it out there once in awhile but this is their 'grab their guns moment'.. and the weaseley (not to denigrate the weasel you understand) politicians don't have the, ahem, fortitude to stand up to this obvious political ploy. They'll probably pass the AR ban and the magazine ban, break their arms patting themselves on the back for a week or so, and then nothing will be said about it.. until someone pops into a gun free school zone and shoots another bunch of kids (shooting today in a CA high school with a shotgun). Oh there will be some maniacs from NY and IL and Brady group still trying.. Everyone says this will be permanent.. like the Bush tax cuts are now.. nothing in congress is permanent..we just need a shift in policy with a willing congress.
|
|
|
|
Post by WILL on Jan 10, 2013 12:27:16 GMT -7
Again, no one is coming to take your guns away. Everyone take a deep breath. At most, we're dealing with a Brady Bill type ban again....if that even materializes. It seems very possible that any assault weapons legislation that does see the light of day may not carry a vote. With the timing of his article, this guy took a hypocritical, alarmist, low road on the issue and I'm calling it. Hypocritical since his right to bear arms is already significantly compromised and he doesn’t seem to care about that. Alarmist because he’s blowing the whistle on something that hasn’t materialized yet (clearly his focus is an assault weapons ban), and low road since he’s building up a lot of hate and fear over something that hasn’t and most likely won’t happen. That is all, you may carry on with your regularly scheduled killing now.
|
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Jan 10, 2013 12:38:23 GMT -7
I'm not feeling any hate or fear over his article.. and I think he makes several really good points.. about what COULD happen vs. burying our collective heads in the sand and ignoring what probably will happen. And I'm not sure where you think 'you may carry on with your regularly scheduled killing now' is funny.
Before I joked with you about letting your feelings out... I was kidding..
I don't think antagonism over an article written by a non forum member but posted on here as a reference is suitable. But it seems you keep taking the 'devil's advocate' role to a new low. But then I'm probably just having my own bad day and am misreading your posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmarshnh on Jan 10, 2013 13:45:55 GMT -7
If Mr. Garrison is a hypocrite and alarmist then in my opinion those who practice and prepare for survival are the same. We are preparing for something that may never occur (we hope), but it is always better to be safe than sorry.
I also think he is no more spreading hate and fear than posters on this site and others like it do. It is called expressing ones opinion, and if we do not like it oh well, it is still a free republic.
Will- as a LEO I would hope that is not your feeling. It is in very bad taste and as a retired Federal LEO it offends me very much. Maybe you should take your own advice in the second sentence.
Everyone is hyper right now and I have purposely tried to keep my real feelings in check since my mother was shot in the head three times in a robbery in Las Vegas in 1976. Although severely handicapped she lived another 22 years, yet never blamed the shooting on the weapons. She met Brady at a severe head trauma rehab center in Dallas and did not particularly care for the gent. My mother, nor anyone in my family, ever supported gun control of any kind.
I am done, for now
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by WILL on Jan 10, 2013 15:31:00 GMT -7
OK, I'm done too.
|
|
|
|
Post by twicebitten on Jan 11, 2013 7:48:49 GMT -7
Anyone interested in a judge's perspective? A personal and long time friend, with whom I disagree regularly, but also highly respect b/c I know he is not trying to hurt anyone. For what it's worth he was the first person to hold my daughter other than my wife and me.
"my take is we need 1) registration and background chks for ALL transfers 2) strict regs for assault weapons including same psych exam police have to take 3) strict regs on high cap clips and ammo 4) much higher taxes on all non self defense/hunting guns and ammo to pay for the regs ... im for the govt allowing just about everything as long as they educate, tax and regulate...including all recreational drugs"
|
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Jan 11, 2013 8:00:58 GMT -7
Hmmm how did he become a judge without reading the constitution?
|
|
|
|
Post by mud on Jan 11, 2013 9:04:23 GMT -7
I seriously resent the fact that people are still calling them assault weapons. Yes i own one so does that make me responsible for what happened two thousand miles away? No? Well stop trying to punish me with these stupid laws. If you want to stop kids from dying start with planned parenthoodwho admits to over three hundred thousand abortions.
Secondly who are you or anyone else for that matter to determine what legit hunting ammo or rifles are? Using that logic ban v8 engines cause nobody needs those or how about cable tv sinve broadcast tv works just fine. Un-*******believable that people beleive they ha e any rights to presume they know what i do or do not need
|
|
|
|
Post by jmarshnh on Jan 11, 2013 9:06:10 GMT -7
Don't it just sound so cool. Educate, Tax, & Regulate. Ya gotta love it.
I agree with thywar, and add did he take an oath to uphold the Constitution? Sounds to me like one of the judges that like to try and legislate from the bench.
Jim
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2013 9:51:38 GMT -7
The bad thing is, most people don't think they can be used for anything BUT assaulting others. I disagree...I have used the same Norinco MAC90 AK-47 since 1989 for deer hunting. That is the ONLY time she comes out of the safe unless it is to pop a few rounds once in a while to keep myself sharp. PROOF these type of guns are good for something besides assaulting people.  |
|
|
|
Post by woodscustom on Jan 13, 2013 8:42:58 GMT -7
Althought I have sold all of my weapons and ammo for twice what I paid for them, after realising the hastle it was going to be to keep them, I do know a thing or two about Strategic Intervention, tactics, and things.
With one 22 and one bullet, a BOW and ARROW for that much, you will be able to get a rifle, and possibly a handgun. With a RIfle, you could have more rifles, better equipment, vehicles, and possibly things to fly.
IED's would make local law scared to even look outside their own homes, much less go to work.
It's a path that the government does NOT want to go down. And bad news spreads like wildfire.
The United States of Afghanistan.
WC
|
|
|
|
Post by missasip on Jan 13, 2013 9:00:59 GMT -7
It's a path that the government does NOT want to go down. And bad news spreads like wildfire. The United States of Afghanistan. WC My thoughts exactly.... Jimmy |
|
|
|
Post by mountainmark on Jan 13, 2013 9:37:45 GMT -7
Althought I have sold all of my weapons and ammo for twice what I paid for them, after realising the hastle it was going to be to keep them, I do know a thing or two about Strategic Intervention, tactics, and things. With one 22 and one bullet, a BOW and ARROW for that much, you will be able to get a rifle, and possibly a handgun. With a RIfle, you could have more rifles, better equipment, vehicles, and possibly things to fly. IED's would make local law scared to even look outside their own homes, much less go to work. It's a path that the government does NOT want to go down. And bad news spreads like wildfire. The United States of Afghanistan. WC Agreed. But I thought all your guns went down in a canoe accident??  |
|
I guess I’m reading a different article than some here. 
Those statements sound like paranoia to me.
