Open calls for tyrannical rule in America now

[RobErvin]

Here it is folks. More open calls not only to repeal the 2nd Amendment, but for a total end to the GOP. This viper opines IF ONLY we elected Hillary, we would have only seen a GRADUAL chipping away at rights by Democrats. But since we rejected her royal HAGness, next option for Marxist Democrats is to institute one party rule and end the 2nd Amendment by any means necessary. Does that sound familiar? It should. It was the exact precursor to all the monstrous totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, who disarmed their populations, and then proceeded with waves of mass murders of the newly defenseless people.
Valdez: YouTube shooting is another blow to the Second Amendment

Read More

 

[nvshooter]

I read through the article in a rapid manner. I saw that the writer suggests-- multiple times-- that the American People should vote for Deception-crat Party candidates in the upcoming elections. How exponentially stupid! That would be like lab mice voting for the rattlesnake in the next aquarium to be the lab's law enforcement officer. We have seen since the years of Sick Willy Klantoon what the Tyranny-crats believe about the Second Amendment. Better to defend that Freedom while we still have it, than to try to recover it once we've lost it...

 

[nmwabbit]

It is interesting the article's author states under DJT's tenure was bad for firearm sales, yet NICS stats show sales for the first three months of this year are larger than last year for the same period.
NICS Firearm Checks: Month/Year

 

[MadDuner]

It appears to me that every day we get closer to the point where we should be using these firearms for the purpose the founding fathers meant them for originally...

 

[nmwabbit]

It appears to me that every day we get closer to the point where we should be using these firearms for the purpose the founding fathers meant them for originally...

Uh, carry them for PD?

 

[MadDuner]

The founding father's thoughts:
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them…"

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."

Or, we can go with the Hitler's thoughts.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."

 

[nvshooter]

Amazing how The Founders and The Framers had such prescience. What's written above reads pretty much just like what Raegan would say. What Hitler said reads pretty much exactly like what the Tyranny-crats have been saying for the several decades since Raegan was in office. I have never read that Hitler said what is written above until just now, but I have read that Himmlery has said something very, very much like it...

 

[nmwabbit]

Ah Goodwin's theorem in practice.

As for Ronald's thoughts as he solely was responsible for disarming an entire state in this union by signing the CA bill banning citizens carrying firearms:
quote: Republicans in California eagerly supported increased gun control. Governor Reagan told reporters that afternoon that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons." He called guns a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." unquote.

Guess the $$$ and political fervor got to the Reagan as he ran for president as his anti gun rhetoric diminished, huh!

Good to see madDuner you got caught in a falsehood about Washington's quote you cited above as here is the original, uncensored as spoken by Washington's first annual address to Congress on January 8, 1790:

quote: A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end, a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies. unquote.

Wow, Mad, you have been sucked in haven't you as i miss everything after disciplined in Washington's original quote!

In fact Mad, "Reading through Washington's speech, it can clearly be seen that when Washington is talking about "a free people," he means the union as a whole should be well-prepared for any threat to the country. He wasn't talking about people being armed and ready to fight their own representatives." No, George Washington Doesn't Want You Armed Against the Government: E-Mail Debunking Part II

please be a good citizen and assure you are quoting what was actually stated and not emotionalized to meet some group's concept of what was said and discern what the speaker's context truly was about!

 

[RobErvin]

Amazing how The Founders and The Framers had such prescience. What's written above reads pretty much just like what Raegan would say. What Hitler said reads pretty much exactly like what the Tyranny-crats have been saying for the several decades since Raegan was in office. I have never read that Hitler said what is written above until just now, but I have read that Himmlery has said something very, very much like it...

The founders had direct experience with Tyranny under the kings and queens of Europe. They new of the dire importance of the rights they protected in the Bill of Rights, since those were one they were denied by their British masters.

 

[MadDuner]

Hey Wabbit....
Please explain for the class this portion of the quote you quoted:
and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies.

That sure reads to me like he wanted the American people to secure and manufacture their own arms. Palmetto State Armory helps Americans do exactly that! AR's must have been imagined even back then.

 

[777Armory]

I will never follow a directive that goes against the constitution, especially from corrupt leaders.

Example: Leland Yee (D-CA)



Also Leland: "Former State Sen. Leland Yee sent to prison for 5 years in gun-running"
Former State Sen. Leland Yee sent to prison for 5 years in gun-running, 'shrimp boy' case

 

[nvshooter]

Why has no one ever seemed to ask these high & mighty rosebuds exactly why law-abiding Americans "cannot own these weapons?" If one was ever asked, I doubt we'd get an answer that wasn't based on emotion, ignorance or fear.

The Framers knew all men were not angels; they knew a small number of men would use arms for evil. That is why they created laws that punish criminals. Owning firearms brings with it the responsibility for what a man does with his firearms. This Yee starfish seems to say that no one should own Black Rifles because it's just a matter of time before a man who owns one uses it to commit a crime. That's disgusting paternalism. It's liberalism. It's cowardice. It's accusing a man for actions that have yet to obtain.

I don't hate too many things, but two things I do hate is being told what I think by those who do not know my mind, and what I will do by those who do not know my history. My parents taught me to be honest and to be responsible. I do not need Yee, Feinswine, Chucky Bullschumer or the entire Tyranny-crat Party to tell me how to live. They can all go to helsinki and rot when they get there...

 

[nvshooter]

Hey Wabbit....
Please explain for the class this portion of the quote you quoted:

. . . and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies.

That sure reads to me like he wanted the American People to secure and manufacture their own arms.

That's exactly what it means. Washington knew that the American People should not depend on other sources for their supply of arms. How easy it would be for there to be an embargo by foreign powers on shot, ingredients for powder and the metals with which to make locks and barrels. Better that Americans could make their own arms because a Free People always have an enemy who wishes to destroy that Liberty and enslave the People. It was England in the late Eighteenth Century. It's the Evil Left in our modern times.

 

[nmwabbit]

Hey Wabbit....
Please explain for the class this portion of the quote you quoted:
and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies.

That sure reads to me like he wanted the American people to secure and manufacture their own arms. Palmetto State Armory helps Americans do exactly that! AR's must have been imagined even back then.

Noticed not a flinch that you initially misconstrued Washington's words whatsoever is there, but that you continue to leave out words to change the meaning to fit your 21 century oblique meaning is hilarious!

Quote: A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end, a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies. unquote.

...a uniform and a well digested plan is requisite...as well as the word "AND" tying the two phrases together!

Ok so mad key words: uniform, well digested plan, and is requisite as well as "and" tied to your premise above: "American" citizens who do not wear a uniform, do not have digested plan, all of which is "made necessary by particular circumstances or regulations." a requisite!

 

[777Armory]

New York Mayor Bill De Blasio: Get Rid of the NRA by Voting Out Republican Lawmakers | Urged the city's pension funds on Friday to divest their holdings in stocks of gun manufacturers.
Also Bill De Blasio: Taxpayers Doling Out Millions to Fund de Blasio's 'Special Assistants' New York Mayor
Bill De Blasio's Assitant: Reagan Stevens, a deputy director in the Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice, was arrested for illegal weapons possession after cops founds a loaded, 9mm semi-automatic pistol with its serial number defaced.
https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/direc...f-criminal-justice-busted-for-gun-possession/

 

[MadDuner]

Noticed not a flinch that you initially misconstrued Washington's words whatsoever is there, but that you continue to leave out words to change the meaning to fit your 21 century oblique meaning is hilarious!

Quote: A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end, a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others for essential, particularly for military supplies. unquote.

...a uniform and a well digested plan is requisite...as well as the word "AND" tying the two phrases together!

Ok so mad key words: uniform, well digested plan, and is requisite as well as "and" tied to your premise above: "American" citizens who do not wear a uniform, do not have digested plan, all of which is "made necessary by particular circumstances or regulations." a requisite!

You are absolutely entirely entitled to your own opinion.
I think you are dead wrong - and the SCOTUS backs my opinion up. But think what you want. No skin off my nuts. I carry every single day - more or less because IT'S MY RIGHT TO! But carry on with your bad self and only have a firearm if you are in a uniform of some sorts - if that's what makes you feel special. If you are not in uniform when you have a gun in your hand - that would make you a hypocrite. Practice what you preach brother!!!

Isn't America great? We are given the right to express ourselves openly as well as the right to defend ourselves from criminals and rogue government - all from the same document! Again, you are free to disagree with me, and I you. And one of the very best parts of it is that there isn't a darn thing either one of us can do about it.

So tell the class all about your digested plan....
What? No digested plan either? And you have guns?
WTF man, what a hypocrite again!

Or do you simply spew your opinions about what you think it means, but completely disregard your convictions because it's convenient?

Tell us all about it.
You know you want to.

 

[nmwabbit]

You are absolutely entirely entitled to your own opinion.
I think you are dead wrong - and the SCOTUS backs my opinion up. But think what you want. No skin off my nuts. I carry every single day - more or less because IT'S MY RIGHT TO! But carry on with your bad self and only have a firearm if you are in a uniform of some sorts - if that's what makes you feel special. If you are not in uniform when you have a gun in your hand - that would make you a hypocrite. Practice what you preach brother!!!

Isn't America great? We are given the right to express ourselves openly as well as the right to defend ourselves from criminals and rogue government - all from the same document! Again, you are free to disagree with me, and I you. And one of the very best parts of it is that there isn't a darn thing either one of us can do about it.

So tell the class all about your digested plan....
What? No digested plan either? And you have guns?
WTF man, what a hypocrite again!

Or do you simply spew your opinions about what you think it means, but completely disregard your convictions because it's convenient?

Tell us all about it.
You know you want to.

You know I am not sure why your are expressing dismay at me, I certainly didn't misquote Washington's quote, you did; additionally I believe if you look at what was posted by me, I do believe I never stated you couldn't carry or for that matter that anybody else couldn't either! So not sure where that came from or how you leaped to a perception like that as even being a concept of the discussion or I am a hypocrite?

Convictions are actually based upon objective evidence not hyperbole of changing passages to make them say whatever oblique concept you wish to spout about! So mad, when I don my sidearm, I am quite comfortable in my knowledge of conviction(s), if you will, not BS bravado!

So, do you have a cite for your commentary regarding the highest court in the land backs you up, i mean really mad, you did so well misconstruing Washington's quote to the congress, I am sure this will be just as interesting to discuss!

As you stated,

Tell us all about it.
You know you want to!

 

[RobErvin]

In fact Mad, "Reading through Washington's speech, it can clearly be seen that when Washington is talking about "a free people," he means the union as a whole should be well-prepared for any threat to the country. He wasn't talking about people being armed and ready to fight their own representatives." No, George Washington Doesn't Want You Armed Against the Government: E-Mail Debunking Part II

Except for the fact that Washington HIMSELF just had fought that very kind of war. The people of the colonies rose up against their rulers in Merry Old England. There was no UNION at the time of that war, just a loose confederacy of colonies who banded together to assert their rights against a tyrannical government.

 

[MadDuner]

Democrats have a very serious problem with hypocrisy.

 

[nmwabbit]

Except for the fact that Washington HIMSELF just had fought that very kind of war. The people of the colonies rose up against their rulers in Merry Old England. There was no UNION at the time of that war, just a loose confederacy of colonies who banded together to assert their rights against a tyrannical government.

Sorry, your kind attention is directed to a small skirmish:
"The Whiskey Rebellion happened in 1794—when settlers in the Monongahela Valley of western Pennsylvania protested against the new federal tax on whiskey, which the settlers shipped across the mountains to earn money. It was the first serious test of the federal government. Washington ordered federal marshals to serve court orders requiring the tax protesters to appear in federal district court. By August 1794, the protests became dangerously close to outright rebellion, and on August 7, several thousand armed settlers gathered near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Washington then invoked the Militia Law of 1792 to summon the militias of several states. A force of 13,000 men was organized, and Washington personally led it to Western Pennsylvania. The revolt immediately collapsed, and there was no violence."

This is what Washington was alluding to!