Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: T.O.M. on January 17, 2013, 10:27:29 AM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/sheriffs-state-lawmakers-push-back-gun-control-100605550.html
Interesting article. We already knew about many of the sheriff's making it clear that they had no intention of enforcing the federal laws on firearms. What I didn't know was how many states are introduing legislation to make the federal laws illegal in their state, and even going so far as to make it illegal for federal authorities to attempt to enforce the federal laws. While I recognize that these laws are in many ways symbolic, it shows how bad the situation has gotten in our country, where you have a government in DC which appears to be so out of touch with what the people want, and instead appear to be dead-set on doing what they believe the people need, that this situation exists. Don't know about you guys, but our local state reps are much more in tune with the real opinions of local people. They walk with and talk with us all the time, since they live among us, as opposed to the fed congresscritters, who walk amongst the people from time to time, and stage big meeting events before retreating to their condos in DC. I've met several of the state reps who come to the court and talk with us about what's going on, and what we need them to do, as opposed to the feds who probably don't know where my courthouse is.
Also interesting that the article compares the situation with laws passed by the feds outlawing slavery, and laws passed by the southern states to invalidate the federal laws...we know how that turned out.
-
I would say the situation is more like the one preceding the American Revolution. The Crown was dictating more than governing and the people finally had enough. It wasn't the taxes per se, but how they were forced upon everyone without allowing their input per the legislative processes of the time.
Chris
-
he feds who probably don't know where my courthouse is.
I'm sure it's on a target list somewhere.
Some documents are timeless
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html)
-
Wow! A Yahoo News article where the majority of comments are supportive of freedom. I don't think I've seen that before.
-
Wow! A Yahoo News article where the majority of comments are supportive of freedom. I don't think I've seen that before.
Moderators must be asleep.
-
It should be interesting. I am aware of some cases where federal officials can be charged with violating state laws and the SC has said they aren't immune from prosecution. In some of the cases, the Feds petitioned to have the cases removed to federal court, where they were dismissed. Even setting aside the possibility of arresting federal agents, the fact that local and state authorities would not cooperate with federal law enforcement in these investigations would make it difficult, to say the least.
-
I think we saw a realistic demonstration of what happens during Brown vs. Board of education, when Eisenhower sent the National Guard to enforce desegregation.
I expect any resistance by the States to be responded to with force, quickly.
-
I think we saw a realistic demonstration of what happens during Brown vs. Board of education, when Eisenhower sent the National Guard to enforce desegregation.
I expect any resistance by the States to be responded to with force, quickly.
In the case of brown, the Feds believed they were doing the right thing....if its a 2A thing....I don't know if they would be as apt, at least considering the actual boots
-
In the case of brown, the Feds believed they were doing the right thing....if its a 2A thing....I don't know if they would be as apt, at least considering the actual boots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqAfFkI7mrI
I don't trust police at all, in light of this video... and the precedent of Katrina.
They WILL come down on the side of the Statists. They WILL attempt to confiscate.
NG? I dunno. Frankly, I'd expect the feds to fling people around in a way that puts NG on foreign war fronts, active duty Army/Marines in domestic locations and away from their own home towns, working on confiscation. And DHS agents are morally bankrupt already.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqAfFkI7mrI
I don't trust police at all, in light of this video... and the precedent of Katrina.
They WILL come down on the side of the Statists. They WILL attempt to confiscate.
NG? I dunno. Frankly, I'd expect the feds to fling people around in a way that puts NG on foreign war fronts, active duty Army/Marines in domestic locations and away from their own home towns, working on confiscation. And DHS agents are morally bankrupt already.
That is how the Russians did it. Use one nationality to crush the other.
-
That is how the Russians did it. Use one nationality to crush the other.
Frankly, I really think it's gonna be TSA VIPR teams that do the heavy lifting on confiscation. It's gonna take fed agents to ignore federal law ('86 FOPA) with impunity.
-
First of all, some of ya ignore the many police organizations, sheriffs, etc that have publically opposed gun control efforts.
Second. We have friends everywhere. Care to guess how many pro 2A folks work in just the .gov IT field alone?
-
Second. We have friends everywhere. Care to guess how many pro 2A folks work in just the .gov IT field alone?
Or in the military/guard/PD forces expected to enforce any fed actions?
Brad
-
Yep.
-
Just heard from a friend in a discussion about the NY ban. He's a 15-20 year vet of a local police department.
"Cops and politicians' protective details should have to abide by the same rules as the rest of America."
He's one of the good guys.
-
Just heard from a friend in a discussion about the NY ban. He's a 15-20 year vet of a local police department.
"Cops and politicians' protective details should have to abide by the same rules as the rest of America."
He's one of the good guys.
Does he take on protective detail (i.e. overtime or on contract basis) for private or political events? When he does so, does he change his weapon away from his duty weapon(s) to regular old weapons that the rest of us can use, with appropriate mag capacity?
For all I know, your friend is in Flyover country where the issue is moot.
But until people in the LEO crowd put their money where their mouth is, it's all words. Katrina is the reality of LEO action until proven otherwise.
-
Does he take on protective detail (i.e. overtime or on contract basis) for private or political events? When he does so, does he change his weapon away from his duty weapon(s) to regular old weapons that the rest of us can use, with appropriate mag capacity?
For all I know, your friend is in Flyover country where the issue is moot.
But until people in the LEO crowd put their money where their mouth is, it's all words. Katrina is the reality of LEO action until proven otherwise.
My friend is in VA. His duty weapon is legal for civilians. He doesn't do protective details for private/political events unless such duty is in the context of his job.
He's also just a stone's through from DC.
I get it. You hate cops.
-
The problem is the political elites are fully aware of how to appeal to folks baser instincts.
Giving law enforcement officers more rights and excluding them from restrictions, giving LEO's even more status is a good way of dividing them from the "mere citizens".
When the left really starts ramping up law enforcement and military vet exclusions you will know they are building their Praetorian Guard.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/sc-bill-would-exempt-state-militia-from-federal-gun-rules/
SC now has a bill in committee with a slightly different twist.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/sc-bill-would-exempt-state-militia-from-federal-gun-rules/
SC now has a bill in committee with a slightly different twist.
Nice, but does this open the door to anti governors/state governments to create "paper" militias, or redefine militia generally, as a path to alternate 2A arguments in defense against future SCOTUS challenges? (Understanding they wouldn't trump Heller, but might create a plausible window for a new SCOTUS to create new precedent.)
-
Half of the guys I work with are LEOs for one department or another and they're ALL very vocal in stating that any law that is in violation of the Constitution is invalid and will not be enforced. If the gov wants to take people's guns in GA, they're going to have to send in troops from elsewhere to do it, and they'll be met with armed resistance. I'm hearing the same thing from a lot of other areas too. There are a few gun-grabbers, of course, but they're a distinct minority.
-
they're going to have to send in troops from elsewhere to do it, and they'll be met with armed resistance
It's not going to be pretty =(
I've been saying for a decade that Iraqistan was just a training exercise :police:
-
It's not going to be pretty =(
I've been saying for a decade that Iraqistan was just a training exercise :police:
But training who? I know a ton of Reservists and Guardsman with a lot of training on how to be an insurgent as well as intimate knowledge on how counter insurgencies are run.
-
But training who? I know a ton of Reservists and Guardsman with a lot of training on how to be an insurgent as well as intimate knowledge on how counter insurgencies are run.
Yeah, kinda bass ackwards in that department. And not to put too fine a point on it, in the process of teaching our troops about IED's and how to counter them, they were necessarily also training them how to construct and employ them. The idea that it was all one big training exercise for the JBT's doesn't make much sense. Based on prior polling data (including some polls that I've run myself) around 75-90% of the current military and veterans (post 9/11) are more likely to either passively or actively resist any sort of tyrannical action U.S. soil, and after 11 years of war in two countries, that's a lot of accumulated knowledge an experience in both conventional and asymetrical warfare.
-
That was my point.
If it was a JBT training camp, it didn't go as they planned....
-
That was my point.
If it was a JBT training camp, it didn't go as they planned....
But completely typical for a government plan
Sent via tapatalk
-
Based on prior polling data (including some polls that I've run myself) around 75-90% of the current military and veterans (post 9/11) are more likely to either passively or actively resist any sort of tyrannical action U.S. soil, and after 11 years of war in two countries, that's a lot of accumulated knowledge an experience in both conventional and asymetrical warfare.
That sounds good, but is there any indication of what they consider "tyrannical action U.S. soil" to be?
-
Gun confiscation, for starters.
Not the whole officer corps, but a whole lot of the NCO corps would resist, and I suspect they'd take a good chunk of their soldiers with em
-
Yeah, kinda bass ackwards in that department. And not to put too fine a point on it, in the process of teaching our troops about IED's and how to counter them, they were necessarily also training them how to construct and employ them. The idea that it was all one big training exercise for the JBT's doesn't make much sense. Based on prior polling data (including some polls that I've run myself) around 75-90% of the current military and veterans (post 9/11) are more likely to either passively or actively resist any sort of tyrannical action U.S. soil, and after 11 years of war in two countries, that's a lot of accumulated knowledge an experience in both conventional and asymetrical warfare.
Yes, no one would want want to support an action openly labeled tyrannical, but how many will be aware at that moment that a given action is tyrannical? Tyrannical action will never be presented as such, never has been. There are many ways to present unconstitutional or otherwise oppressive actions so they seem justified, lawful, or just plain necessary to avoid a greater evil. Lord knows people are suckers for "the lesser of two evils". Particularly for an institution who's culture is entrenched in obeying and following top-down orders, where information is segregated and tiered, I don't have much faith that everyone is going to suddenly be in a frame of mind to start questioning and disobeying, let alone actively resisting their command if emergency orders start coming in.
Now if you tell me that entire units are constantly engaged in rebellious thinking and plotting against their command that would be different.
-
As an example of one of the polls I ran it asked if they would execute orders for gun confiscation if a constitutional amendment was passed repealing the 2nd. 85% and respondents said they would not confiscate privately owned firearms under any circumstances.
-
I sure hope things have changed since I was in at the end of the Vietnam era. In 1974 through about 1980, most of the Marines I served with would have quite willingly followed orders to confiscate private arms and march any recalcitrant folks off the camps. The political ignorance in those days (mine included) was very pervasive.
-
I think things have changed ...
We try not to create robots in BCT anymore ...
-
I think things have changed ...
We try not to create robots in BCT anymore ...
When do they turn into robots now, at about O5 or O6?
-
I'm not so confident in the military being on "our side".
Given the the way any "uprising" would be portrayed by the media after a prolonged disinformation campaign any group could be conditioned to do what the command wants. Send a northeast NG or Reserve unit down to the deep south to deal with a problem. The first time one of the "band of brothers" takes fire or gets killed all bets are off.
One minor fire fight and it would be labeled as a full blown insurrecton and all bets are off.
-
Larry, The thing is that deep south town (or NE if it's reversed) will have a NG unit of it's own. It's less of how many of the.mil will follow bad orders, but whether they'll be physically capable of following them. I would expect the active military to be split in about half and the part timers to almost universally side with their homes.
-
When do they turn into robots now, at about O5 or O6?
When they arrive at Annapolis or West Point. =|
Larry, The thing is that deep south town (or NE if it's reversed) will have a NG unit of it's own. It's less of how many of the.mil will follow bad orders, but whether they'll be physically capable of following them. I would expect the active military to be split in about half and the part timers to almost universally side with their homes.
Not to stray too close to the rules, but I've heard more than a few NG NCO's with keys to the armories state that they'd sooner start handing out hardware to the local citizenry than be complicit in such orders. (And no, this isn't a "my friend" type story, I'm not talking about myself here as I'm not NG.)
-
I LOVE throwing these various "red state demographics" of the .mil, the oath, election polls of .mil members for the past 30-odd years etc. as yet one more point when debating an anti who tries the "you can't fight the modern US .mil with tanks and planes/drones" gambit to imply the 2A is "outdated" with me.
It really gets them thinking and shuts them up at the same time.
However, privately, while all this anecdotal evidence heartens me, The Milgram experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment gives me the dark feeling that we at least ought to cut any estimates of the .mil "on our side" in half, at least.
Given the right timing, and the right pressure, there's an Auschwitz prison guard in almost all of us somewhere. =(
Which of course makes the 2A all the more important.
-
Larry, The thing is that deep south town (or NE if it's reversed) will have a NG unit of it's own. It's less of how many of the.mil will follow bad orders, but whether they'll be physically capable of following them. I would expect the active military to be split in about half and the part timers to almost universally side with their homes.
One of RKL's points was that the order wouldn't just come out of the blue.
Laws of this sort tend to be incremental, and the people who break the law first are more easily demonized. As an example, we hear about the cops (or soldiers) who would never, ever come take people's guns, but those same men and women would likely not be so recalcitrant if ordered to seize unregistered machine guns and suppressors from a fringe group of lawbreakers. There may be a few in law enforcement or the military who would ignore an illegal machine gun, but most would happily confiscate it and arrest the owner.
Paint a small enough subset of gun-owners in the right light and you can get someone to go after them no problem. If the enforcer takes fire, the enforcer's buddies will come running and it ceases to be about taking guns and becomes about protecting your buddies and yourself.
I doubt the military would get involved in any early-stage confiscation anyway. If many police started to get hurt then they might start sending in troops, but a bunch of cop-killers won't get sympathy from anyone.
-
Paint a small enough subset of gun-owners in the right light and you can get someone to go after them no problem. If the enforcer takes fire, the enforcer's buddies will come running and it ceases to be about taking guns and becomes about protecting your buddies and yourself.
Neo-nazis, skinheads, white supremacists, anti-American militias, extremist cults.
Enough bad press ahead of time to lay the ground work.
Waco & Ruby Ridge were both portrayed as evil entities threatening the whole of the country. It took years for the truth to come out..
We've learned from those and similar actions but so have they.
-
One of RKL's points was that the order wouldn't just come out of the blue.
Laws of this sort tend to be incremental, and the people who break the law first are more easily demonized. As an example, we hear about the cops (or soldiers) who would never, ever come take people's guns, but those same men and women would likely not be so recalcitrant if ordered to seize unregistered machine guns and suppressors from a fringe group of lawbreakers. There may be a few in law enforcement or the military who would ignore an illegal machine gun, but most would happily confiscate it and arrest the owner.
Paint a small enough subset of gun-owners in the right light and you can get someone to go after them no problem. If the enforcer takes fire, the enforcer's buddies will come running and it ceases to be about taking guns and becomes about protecting your buddies and yourself.
I doubt the military would get involved in any early-stage confiscation anyway. If many police started to get hurt then they might start sending in troops, but a bunch of cop-killers won't get sympathy from anyone.
Yep. This. =(