Utah Sheriffs Prepared to 'Trade Our Lives'- Refusing Any Federal Gun Confiscations

Originally posted by Xcathdra
They are called elections...

You have a choice.... Either be heard or be silenced.

Well we tried that route. We heard Clinton Curtis, but were still silenced by Diebold and a few others.

It's called hacked voting machines. They have systematically torn down every recourse, and they are attempting now to take the last one. You see that other thread about the DemoBrat that objected to public disclosure of the proposal for outright confiscations?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I mean these people surely want war.

I am very proud of these sheriffs.

THAT is a loyal American....

Thank you guys where ever you may be.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Something people in the US and who vote should be aware of....

You do NOT have to use voting machines.. All you need to do is request a paper ballot.

Originally posted by TKDRL
I hope this trend keeps on growing. Without local cooperation, FEDs are powerless to enforce anything. With local sheriffs outright resisting, it might get interesting indeed.

A sheriff is the law of the land and hold all jurisdiction in their county. Feds can't do anything technically.

Gs

I for one see a defiant trend emerging in rural and western states.

Originally posted by Screwed
Please don't misunderstand me, I am not trying to be negative but, you all DO realize that this was forseen by them as an eventuality right?

I think that what is happening is GREAT!!!
My home state is putting up a fight too and I couldn't be happier.
I have been walking around with my head held high and my balls hangin' low all week long.

HOWEVER, what these states are doing is going to be the beginning not the end.
This is what will lead to Civil War in this country and will Prompt Obama to call in the U.N. as well as declare Martial Law.

I mean, you DO realize this right?
Tell me I am not the only one who sees this from a mile away.

I'm ready to rock and roll, as much as I'll ever be I suppose.
But I am under no illusion that this is going to be as easy as writing letters to the President.
That is a GREAT start but............it is ONLY a start.
#s gonna get real!
#s goin' down.

Keep writing letters but, keep your head on a swivel too.

edit on 21-1-2013 by Screwed because: (no reason given)

Don't want to get drawn into another gun debate thread. Your country, your choice. However, regarding this UN paranoia / hysteria that i have noticed creeping in regarding US Gun Control - my question is why? Why do you think the UN would get involved? Why do you think the UN would be allowed to get involved?

That is a serious question, not nit picking or such like. The USA is THE big player on the P5 at the Security Council. No UN "security" action can take place without agreement by the P5 - the US would obviously veto any such action, even if it was proposed. Therefore i really do not understand why any think this a big UN plan. It isn't, clearly, as it wouldn't even be worth planning something that has no possible way of happening...........

However, if others disagree, please explain why. If i am wrong, i accept that. As always, i just ask to be shown why so i can then reassess my position.


To TA,

Sorry for going off topic, it is just that this seems to be cropping up more and more relating to these types of threads. Very interesting information posted though, thank you.

I don't think I have heard anything about gun confiscation. I've heard talk about an assault weapons ban, but that wouldn't be retro-active. The gov't won't be coming around to take your guns, ammo or large capacity mags. If I've missed it somewhere can someone please point me to where they've state that they want to confiscate our guns? It all seem like paranoia to me

I am guessing people have the idea now...

No gun confiscation, not going to happen..

Not in this generation, the next, or the one after....

Lets have one thing clear, I'm pro gun. But not because I'm a gun collector, hunter or survivalist. I have no need for a gun currently. I'm at the age that recoil of weapons is hard on my old bones and arthritis. But rather my need is as an implement of protection. I am a Vet, was behind a M60 machine gun in aviation as a doorgunner, and sharpshooter. That was by necessity. In the military it is a given, and basically the purpose of the military and the primary tool of a soldier.
I say this to show I'v been trained in the proficiency of small arms, and that in doing so I am aware of the safety practices.
In households where children reside, measures must be taken to secure and lock your weapons, on this we can all agree. And it would be prudent to teach your children at the appropriate age the use and safety of guns.
I wish this was a world where guns didn't exist, nor hate or crime or war, but sadly that has never been the case, and because of that i find it necessary to own a gun. For self protection.

I echo the concerns of other citizens in the need to uphold the second amendment, own weapons and safeguard against government which has gone out of control. We all know the consequence of governments that disarm their citizens and then impose their will upon the people, knowing they have no defense against their tyranny.
I applaud those states which are coming to their senses and throwing down the corrupt dictates of a government out of control hell bent on controlling every aspect of ones lives.
As has been said many times, freedom is not free, and weapons are the great equalizer.

I have visited this website for years, and have read thread after thread about the creeping tyranny and political corruption that is stalking the free world, looking to suckerpunch all of us, and always i had one single question on my mind...where the hell are all the good guys, where are the cavalry riding to our rescue?!

Well, now i know.

They are wearing sheriffs badges and are now standing up and being counted, and i'm breathing a huge sigh of relief that at last the good guys are coming out of cover and making their voices heard and their hearts felt.

You have to understand America..this isn't just about you...i know that sounds selfish, but like it or not, you really are the absolutely last line of defence for freedom on this little world of our.

If you go under...the rest of the free world will go under too..and quickly.

It's a huge responsibility i know..but if not you, then who else?

Thank you Sheriffs of America.

I've had a feeling that there very well could be people willing to give their lives for the 2nd amendment....perhaps becoming a martyr for the cause.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Something people in the US and who vote should be aware of....

You do NOT have to use voting machines.. All you need to do is request a paper ballot.

We have rarely seen eye-to-eye on things. But after your posts here in this thread, I would not have a problem calling you my friend.

Now on topic,

It's not going to be US marshals, Army, etc. that will be knocking on our doors. It will be UN soldiers. Just look at the attitude coming from most of our European and Australian brothers here on ATS alone. Not to mention those like Piers Morgan.

Originally posted by HandyDandy

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Something people in the US and who vote should be aware of....

You do NOT have to use voting machines.. All you need to do is request a paper ballot.

We have rarely seen eye-to-eye on things. But after your posts here in this thread, I would not have a problem calling you my friend.

Now on topic,

It's not going to be US marshals, Army, etc. that will be knocking on our doors. It will be UN soldiers. Just look at the attitude coming from most of our European and Australian brothers here on ATS alone. Not to mention those like Piers Morgan.

Perfect example of the UN paranoia. The UN would have absolutely no involvement, for the reasons i stated above (plus a myriad of reasons i didn't bother to go into).

Your issue, your decisions, your choice. Nothing to do with us Europeans, Australians or any UN involvement.

Originally posted by Flavian
Perfect example of the UN paranoia. The UN would have absolutely no involvement, for the reasons i stated above (plus a myriad of reasons i didn't bother to go into).

Your issue, your decisions, your choice. Nothing to do with us Europeans, Australians or any UN involvement.

So, it was only the USA and not really the UN that invaded Iraq? Or was I mistaken thinking that there were Europeans and Australians fighting too?

Have you ever heard of UN resolutions? How about UN resolutions regarding arms control?

reply to post by HandyDandy


Completely different scenario. Iraq (although wrong, in my opinion) was invaded after agreement by Security Council members. As i stated above, the Security Council makes these sorts of decisions (rather than the General Assembly) and the Permanent 5 members have the power of veto over any vote.

So, hypothetically, even if, say, Russia decides to table a motion regarding this, the USA would veto it and nothing would happen. No P5 member has ever allowed any UN military action (which a gun confiscation would amount to) within its territory and they won't be changing that policy in the forseeable future. Aside from anything, the international loss of face would prohibit it ever happening.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the UN. This is a US decision (and agenda if you like) that will only be pushed and pursued by US legislators. I understand that people do not like the UN but please leave them out of it regarding this particular topic.

This is solely a US decision. If our US members do not like the positions being taken by their political elite then they need to focus on that elite rather than the "boogeymen" that have nothing to do with this.

ETA:

Arms Resolutions? You mean like on Cluster Bombs? (that the US would not sign up to). You see? P5 member so different rules apply. All sorts of arguments about whether the P5 should have powers that don't apply to other nations but that is a side issue. If a P5 member says no, that is that.

TrueAmerican,

Sorry for going off topic again with this but i hope you can see why this particular angle needs putting to bed. For those of you seriously against any gun restrictions then the UN is clearly not where you should be focusing your anger. It is entirely the wrong target and will make absolutely no difference one way or the other to the eventual outcome.

In point of fact, the only way the UN would ever get feet on the ground in the US is if the USA has a complete breakdown and descends into anarchy like Afghanistan or the Congo - and look how long it took before any action was taken in either of those places.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Wow, I am considering writing a letter to the editor in my community with this exceptional and brave letter to POTUS. I think people need to understand the tidal wave of trouble we will be in if the train is allowed to run the fast track towards the desecration of our constitution and without the second we will not have a constitution any longer.

I would like to see compiled into one thread all of these types of letters to pull together for the article.

reply to post by Flavian


My husband who works for the UN in arms control says that:

"when we signed on to the UN Program of Action (POA) against the illicit trade of small arms and light weapons in the early 2000's, we made it very clear that we would not accept any international controls on small arms and light weapons which in our view violated our national constitution's 2nd amendment."

So, you are telling me that the US had to sign something stating that it would not accept any international controls on small arms (POA which is in effect as we speak in other countries) because of it's 2nd amendment but that it happens to this day in other countries. And that's not a UN resolution and action taken to control small arms in countries?

What happens when the US disbans the 2nd amendment?

Oh, that's right, that gives the UN full reign........

I love living here in Utah, laws are stricter in some regards than other states, but the economy is good, opportunities better than most states, and people are generally living the good life here.

That said, challenging the executive branch like this could be a problem, Utah is gearing up for legal fights with the federal government over their ownership of so much of the land here, the U.S. government has the land and prevents the state from using the abundant natural resources here, Utah is going to fight the federal government for the land, and apparently now over gun rights.

I'd expect that there will be problems ahead for Utah with the allocation of federal funds, among other things.

Looks like Utah is going to be considered an "enemy state" by the Obama administration.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Yep, I love it. And the people in masses will stand behind the LEO there.

Hope this really does continue to roll on to other states.

reply to post by HandyDandy


It is an agreement that countries will work towards those goals. Nothing is set in stone (that is enforceable). This is also an area that i know well (like your husband) although, to be fair, i was involved in Conflict Resolution and not arms control (like he was / is).

There are all sorts of UN agreements that countries have not signed up to. And even in those countries that have signed up to various agreements, P5 members can not have them enforced (whether they agreed or not).

Check it out for yourself though. All of this information is freely available. Rather than being influenced by myself or your husband or anybody else, check it out and make your own conclusions. If you are against gun control in the US your enemy is your elected representatives, NOT the UN. So why waste time, effort and energy on the UN?

ETA:

Actually, rereading your post i now believe you are being wilfully ignorant of the machinations of the UN. If your husband works for them, he should know how the UN operates.......