Patriot Group Fights Back Against Confiscation Order: ‘We Are Armed… Familiar With Marksmanship

In Washington state and many others there are no requirements to report stolen or lost firearms. I foresee a rash of lost, stolen, misplaced firearms in the near future. Along with a bunch of boating accidents leading to gun loss.

God help these legislators if some of their stupidity results in any children's or spousal deaths. At that point it will become safeties free.

We are being kicked to the curb and treated like
economical refugees by Washington at an exponential
rate as it is. Can you imagine if they had us unarmed
on top of it?

Game over.

It is obvious that there is a Cult of The Second Amendment. Its Holy Text is eleven words long: "The right to own and bear arms shall not be infringed." These eleven words may not be contextualized, nor may they be interpreted in any but the most rigid and orthodox way. If any part of the Constitution disagrees with the Orthodoxy, that part of the Constitution is to be ignored. This Orthodoxy believes that the Holy Amendment gives individuals the right, even duty, to overthrow a duly elected government by force of arms. It ignores the apparatus established in the Constitution for determining the constitutionality of a law, and awards it directly to individuals, who may act freely upon their conclusions without recourse to consequences.

As in any cult, there is a promise of impending global change. In the UFO Forum, the adherents of that cult announce the impending Disclosure, in which the Government will reveal the Truth about Extra-terrestrials. This Disclosure has been trumpeted as imminent for decades, and has never arrived, nor shall it. In the Cult of the Second Amendment, the day will come when All The Guns Will Be Seized. All 350 million of them. Presumably over-night, like some sort of dark Rapture.

Not everyone who has made arguments here are fully initiated members of this cult. Some of you, particularly navydoc, are grounded in history and make rational arguments. All too many of you, though, seem to be hypnotized, repeating the same eleven words over and over again. All too many of you can scarcely conceal the fact that you harbor dreams of insurrection. That is why you cannot understand how ill conceived the letter in the OP was.

MrSpad
Nobody is going to raise the flag of revolt because they have to register their assault weapons.

Put down the cool aid.
Take three steps backwards.













The British burned down the capitol and years later the legislature made friends with them.

People gave up guns, and years later the legislature makes enemies of them.

reply to post by DJW001







Funny, as you think that just repeating the Progressive crap you have picked up from Anti-Gun rights groups and sites means much.


Oh, forgot to mention. Personally, debating it with you is more fun, then anything. You, your voice, is a non issue. You don't live here, you don't vote here and you sure as hell don't understand "here".

Thanks for playing though.

reply to post by DJW001

All too many of you can scarcely conceal the fact that you harbor dreams of insurrection. That is why you cannot understand how ill conceived the letter in the OP was.

I'll let someones else speak to that issue but I hold him in the highest regard and am thankful for his words just as you should be.

"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
- Thomas Jefferson 30 January 1787 & 13 November 1787

And that's all I have to say about that.

macman
reply to post by DJW001

 

Funny, as you think that just repeating the Progressive crap you have picked up from Anti-Gun rights groups and sites means much.


Oh, forgot to mention. Personally, debating it with you is more fun, then anything. You, your voice, is a non issue. You don't live here, you don't vote here and you sure as hell don't understand "here".

Thanks for playing though.

So because he doesn't live here in the US he can't understand the Constitution?

*blink*

I understand it all too well and I do not consider this a violation, an infringement OR a "gun grab" it's registration pure simple and to the point. The day they come and take it, then we can talk infringement, until then, it's a bunch of angry rhetoric that is going to get someone killed.

To the other poster that thinks the 2nd Amendment says you can have a rocket launcher, it certainly does not cover that.. in any way shape manner or form..

vkey08

macman
reply to post by DJW001

 

Funny, as you think that just repeating the Progressive crap you have picked up from Anti-Gun rights groups and sites means much.


Oh, forgot to mention. Personally, debating it with you is more fun, then anything. You, your voice, is a non issue. You don't live here, you don't vote here and you sure as hell don't understand "here".

Thanks for playing though.

So because he doesn't live here in the US he can't understand the Constitution?

*blink*

I understand it all too well and I do not consider this a violation, an infringement OR a "gun grab" it's registration pure simple and to the point. The day they come and take it, then we can talk infringement, until then, it's a bunch of angry rhetoric that is going to get someone killed.

To the other poster that thinks the 2nd Amendment says you can have a rocket launcher, it certainly does not cover that.. in any way shape manner or form..

1). So would having to register a typewriter or your books or your religion with the state be considered an infringement of your first amendment rights or not?

2). Registration already has lead to confiscation in several regions by the very same politicians who said it wouldn't happen so, we already have examples of them "coming and taking them."

reply to post by DJW001


I don't trust the criminals running this, our government. And I don't trust people
who, can't seem to get enough government control in our lives and remain blind, to
the obvious corruption, pretending there's no reason at all to distrust our perfect
lil panzy ass lord fontleroy cattle herders. People who refuse for some odd reason
to understand that freedom can disappear over nite, if it isn't preserved. Anyone
showing zero concern for liberty, freedom, our rights and the constitution, seems
highly suspect to me. While no accusations can be made about someone who
intentionally tries to diminish the genuine concerns that people have, using buzz
words like cult? While seeing no obvious signs that the person is just loopy.
I'd keep an eye on a person like that.

reply to post by vkey08


So you'd be okay with registering your computer and giving the government your IP Address just in case you ever typed something that might not be okay?

You know I love ya, but any encroachment (no matter how benign) is, by definition, an encroachment.

DJW001
And thus you have just explained why they will never be able to confiscate all your guns. Since it is logistically impossible, what is everyone afraid of?

What are we afraid of? Idiots actually trying; a group that goes out in the "highways and byways of the United States and, under color of law, violate civil and constitutional rights". That by the way is specifically prohibited by federal law, it carries a stiff penalty; prison and fine. If you like I can go look up the citation.

Here is a better idea. Take the recourses required for registration and enforcement and apply it to finding a better way to manage the mentally "needy" so that perhaps they too can live a long and productive life. And perhaps not simply "go off" on society.

As for the true "criminal" element...that can be significantly offset by an armed populace.

This is Connecticut State law under discussion in the OP, right?

So, the State of Connecticut is also a tyrant, rights-stealer, et. al. ... just like the Federal govt., since when?

Doesn't Connecticut, under the Tenth Amendment, have the right to govern itself as its People decide?

The People of Connecticut have duly elected representatives, and those representatives have passed these laws.

How can anyone argue that this is anything but the very essence of what the Bill of Rights requires?

Connecticut has passed these laws at the will of the People, evidently, as there has been no referendum.

The fact that a subset of the People of Connecticut don't agree with the law or implementation doesn't mean that Connecticut is acting as a tyrant. In fact, under the law of Militia, you are sworn to uphold the laws of your State.

Connecticut's Constitution has this to say:

"SEC. 15. Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state."

This seems pretty clear.

reply to post by DJW001


You have yet to create a salient argument. Instead, we get your little bits of sarcasm.

This boils down to the simple fact that it is no ones business what kinds of items I own. I know you and others will assert that it is someone's business. But it isn't. Because it is mine.

I think our fathers gave too much ground based on various arguments from fear that have circulated for years. I wish they hadn't.

I haven't touched a single firearm (including my own) in a couple of months. There is no love there. It has nothing to do with any kind of cult. It has everything to do with, they are mine....what business is it of yours?

If you want to substitute any item in my possession right now, I would feel almost the same way. Because i can defend myself myriad other ways, including bow/arrow and crossbow. I also have several medieval weapons like maces/morning stars.

It has everything to do with me being a free man, and being sick and tired of people who want to nose into my business without cause. Its no ones business if i have a gun. Or if i have a book. Or if I have gold. Its mine.

As a matter of fact, why not support government registration of all computers and laptops!

Child porn is an ugly horrible thing. This way, government can find the bad guys right away!

When you buy a computer, (there is a 3 week waiting period, background checks) you are given a government-issued IP address. It'll be tracked, and monitored and flagged if anything naughty comes to it or is done by it.

But if you're not doing anything bad, there will be nothing to worry about. (or aboot if you're Canadian)

Now different politicians come and go. Different ideologies come and go. A new administration may not like it if you are downloading Muslim sites or Christian sites, or Tea Party sites, or Fluffy Bunny sites.

But by then, it'll be too late.


But hey, it was to stop child pornography.

reply to post by Gryphon66


Excepting laws that are unjust.

Yes, i know i am not in CT.

reply to post by vkey08


BUt what if i do not want to register my property with the government who i have every reason to not trust? Its mine. I paid for it. It isn't given to me, nor do i get a tax break for it. I earn the money to buy it, store it, maintain it, and use it. 100% me. Why does anyone else get a say in what i do with it? Its mine.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Gryphon66

 

Excepting laws that are unjust.

Yes, i know i am not in CT.

So then, your argument is that each individual can decide for themselves at any moment which laws are just and unjust and act accordingly?

Where is that in the Constitution (either of the US or of Connecticut?)

reply to post by Gryphon66


Civil disobedience is the underpinning of our constitution, the declaration of independance, and the magna carta. Our nation was founded on an act of civil disobedience. The 2nd amendment has been directly linked to protecting our right to civil disobedience by ensuring that we can fight a tyrannical government.

The better question would be to ask where in our constitution acts of civil disobedience are not supported. Civil disobedience and constitutionalism go hand in hand.

1. The United States Constitution does not allow laws that stand in contradiction to it to stand.
2. The Constitution provides a means by which the constitutionality of a law can be settled.
3. This process involves filing a lawsuit that brings the law before the Supreme Court of the United States.
4. Until such law is overturned, it stands.
5. It is not for an individual citizen to pick and choose which laws or parts of the Constitution they wish to obey.
6. If you feel that a specific law potentially violates one of your rights, you have the ability to file a lawsuit.
7. Nearly every law that has been challenged on the basis of the Second Amendment has been struck down.

Given the above, why the threats against lawmakers?

reply to post by Gryphon66

Doesn't Connecticut, under the Tenth Amendment, have the right to govern itself as its People decide?

Not since the War to Abrogate the Tenth Amendment and Centralize the Economy, Culture, and Government

Actually I do agree that a state should be able to do that, and any state should also be able to let its citizens own and do anything that does not hurt others. People would and should move to the state that suits them best. Over time, according to collectivist one-size-fits-all mentality, the states would all have similar governments.

Most libertarians think that there would always be a socialist state somewhere, full of natural born socialists. And that's OK if that's the way you are. Just don't push it onto the whole world. Recruit by impressively successful social conditions, not by the coercion of governmental deadly force.