Minutemen without guns?

D

Daren Thompson

New member
Thanks to the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts new strict gun control law Revelutionary War re enactors can no longer carry firearms, even muskets. Where have we gone wrong? How can the state of Massachusetts cling to it's war for independence roots when it has banned the key element of that war, the armed citizen.
Later
Daren
 
Are you kidding us? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. > :( Well I'll be a son of a... Can it get any more freakin' ridiculous? How much longer will we take the SUBJECTS treatment? We are CITIZENS, damn all of our crossed little eyes. The government ON ALL LEVELS work for US. They are PUBLIC SERVANTS, not our damned RULERS. There was even one of these congressional bastards in the news a while back. Part of his enlightened banter about how congress was functioning included the OUTRAGEOUS statement: "The people expect more than that from their RULERS". The SOB actually said "rulers". Down and around the bowl we're spinning as a free people. We already pay about 25% of our damned wages in taxes. We pay taxes when we spend our already-taxed money, when we save it, when it's a gift. And we even have the same money taxed yet again when its' INHERITED. And along with this taxation-enslavement we now have the vulture of gun-control pecking at the tattered corpse of our supposed RIGHT to keep and bear arms. C'mon folks, the Nazis used the same tactics with the exact same poster-children (public safety and aiding law-enforcement). Here is a quote from Adolph Hitler in 1935: "This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient and the world will follow our lead into the future." Wait, dusty old history stuff, right? Of no importance, right? Go stand inside the grounds at AUSCHWITZ and scoff at history. Okay, here's two from William Jefferson Clinton. Our president, who took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America (Damn, He took this oath twice!): "This bill needs to pass. This is a huge problem, the police don't have a chance, and the people don't live in safety." That was in 1994, as he and his taxpayer-salaried officials twisted arms for the Crime Bill w. Assault Ban. Next: "People sometimes need to sacrifice individual rights for public safety." Again in 1994, as he was stumping for warrantless police search and siezures in public-housing. He and his supporters have all but literally wiped their behinds on their oaths of office, our Bill of Rights, and now, with this Fascism on the loose in Massachusetts - on our very intelligence. As I said earlier, son of a...

NOTE: I just found out through an e-mail and a visit to a linked site that the "Hitler" quote is likely an Urban Legend type HOAX. I doubt that the stupid-ass who originated it will read this here, but damn it - the truth, common-sense, morality, history and the Bill of Rights are ALL already on our side. No need to turd-up the pool for everyone trying to swim against the gun-control whirlpool! I retract my use of the bad-quote and sincerely apologize for my irresponsible posting of it. If I were to do any less, and to continue to spread false information, then I'd be just as big a liar and hypocrite as those we struggle against! - Russ

Here is the site I referred to:

http://www.urbanlegends.com/politics/hitler_gun_control.html

[This message has been edited by Herr Glockner (edited 02-03-99).]
 
So what do they do, point their fingers and yell "BANG"??

Time to vote with your vacation dollars, be sure to write the MA Dept of Tourism expressing your disgust over how a state that fathered so many great patriots could become a pit of sniveling revisionist a-hole whimps (but be polite).

Come on down to VA, we do pretty good Civil War re enactments with muskets that go BOOM and you can even smell REAL GUNPOWDER. M2



[This message has been edited by Mike in VA (edited 02-03-99).]
 
Sorry I was a little off. The re enactors can carry firearms(muskets) in public, they must have a bright orange trigger lock securely attached.
Later
Daren
 
So, now the British and Hessians may disarm our patriots in comparative safety. Sheeshhh, how much sillier can they get. Like it says on one posting, it's a matter of civil rights.
 
Ill tell ya where we went wrong, by slowly becoming more " humain". When my grandfather died in a world war to preserve freedom for us, the country was strong. During the 60's and 70"s this country went through its equal rights period, thats when it all went to ****. Now the mind set in this country is that the people pay there taxs and every thing is o.k. The bad thing is if you cant give your fare share, the government makes me make the difference. Well my friend thats wrong. If you dont pull your weight you get real skinny, then you die.

------------------
 
I should have put this in my previous post "Not withstanding the military establishments in several kingdoms of Europe... the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."----James Madison.
Its hard to Dictate an armed populas.
 
I just find it a total disgrace to every war/conflict that America has ever fought for freedom. Our own very war for indepence, the backbone of almost every war/skirmish/ect(prior to 1900) , the armed American, can not legally carry a firearm in the re enactment. Just venting agian

Later
Daren
 
Presently local, state, and federal taxes constitute 50% of the middle class American's income. Once civilian disarmament, which began in the 1930s, is achieved, our rulers will take the rest.
 
It was not the sixties and seventies when it all "went to ****" :) It has been going to hell in a handbasket throughout this century as what was once known as the Progressive movement adopted Fabian tactics. The 16th Amendment, Prohibition, the National Firearms Act of 1934, the New Deal, payroll withholding during WWII, the proliferation of executive orders (another name for rule by decree), the drug laws, property seizure without due process, no knock searches, and on and on ad nauseum. The stage has been set for a long, long time. It's like being nibbled to death by ducks.

And it's not a conspiracy. No conspiracy is necessary. All that is necessary is the normal range of human nature and that nature's reaction to power over others coupled with many people's fear of personal responsibility and their yearning for a chimerical security.
 
Like Spartacus, I contend that the decline started with 16th Amendment which allowed for personal income tax. The Founding Fathers never meant for a strong centralized Federal Government and deliberately kept it weak by limiting the power to tax. Congress always had the power to tax, but it was very limited. The 16th Amendment allowed the floodgate to be opened since the power to tax is the power to destroy. The Fed. Govt. began growing because it now had to resources from which it could draw upon. More government, more regulations.

This was followed by Roosevelt's Alpahbet Soup programs during the '30s. The Supreme Court found no constitutional basis to allow many of these programs and accordingly struck them down. Infuriated, Roosevelt threatened to pack the Supreme Court with enough justices such that he could have his way. From that point on (until Rehnquist), the Supreme Court gave Congress and the President virtually everything they wanted. Perhaps the most outrageous decision was the application of the "commerce clause" as to granting police powers to the Federal Govt (while I can't cite the case, perhaps Lopez, I know that this was recently curtailed by Rehnquist).

It may well be too little too late for the Court to reverse the years of neglect and abuse of authority by the other two branches of the Federal Govt. BTW, remember when the Martians fried Congress in the movie, "Mars Attacks?" Like Pres. Jack Nicholson said, "Well, we still have two out of three branches of government and that ain't so bad."

While I abhor the concept of a new constitutional convention, (I don't believe the current Congress has half the wisdom of the Madison, Pickney, Adams, et al), I would like to see an amendment to protect the Supreme Court and limit it to the present size.

Long live Rehnquist! I'll climb off my soapbox now.
 
I think Spartacus has summed up the situation very well, but I have another thought about the time that the decline of liberty in America began. A study of American history between the formation of the union and the civil war reveals that Americans enjoyed a level of freedom that has not existed before or since that time in any major nation. Many of the small governmental intrusions on our privacy and civil liberties that we accept as normal and routine would have been cause for outrage in the citizens of that period. I believe it was that level of freedom that the nations founders thought they were bequeathing to their posterity in the Constitution.


The desperate times brought on by the war to regain the secessionist states brought about a new attitude in the government and the people of the time. Lincoln was willing to override the Constitution in order to achieve his goal of reunion of the states, and many of his edicts were recognized as plainly unconstitutional at the time. However, the need to "save the union" was perceived by most to be of greater importance than the need to preserve the freedoms that were sacrificed.

I realize that desperate circumstances may call for desperate measures, but the fact remains that America, at least for whites, was much freer before the war than after. In my opinion, the war fostered a feeling among many people that only a big government could cope with the big problems of a big nation, and that the loss of some freedom was necessary and acceptable. This feeling or belief has grown into acceptance as normal, by most people at least, of the huge, arrogant, abomination that our government has become. .

I believe the loss of liberty will accelerate as the nation becomes increasingly urban and people become more dependent on government for every need. Sad to say, but I don't believe the right to keep and bear arms will survive through the present generation.
 
Ed,
I disagree with your view of the right to keep and bear arms. Despite the fact that the current situation looks bleak, as long as americans who believe in freedom and the constitution breath we have hope.

I also believe that if the day ever comes that government tries to send men to our homes to collect our guns, they will be in for a shock. For a soldier (or LEO for that matter) not only has the right, but a duty to disobey an illegal order. I don't believe they will find many who are willing to risk there life for a cause they don't believe in. I still have faith in the fact that those who sreve our country do so because they believe in freedom. And even if they do come, they'll get my guns one bullet at a time.
 
Ed, you are right about the War Between the States being the watershed. But it was not so much the unconstitutional acts of President Lincoln during the war as much as settling the issue of states' right on the battlefield. Lord Acton (often misquoted in the "Power corrupts...absolute power corrupts absolutely") contended that the defeat of the Confederacy was the death knell for liberty in the United States as a whole because it opened the door for the unlimited (over time) expansion of the powers of the federal government at the expense of the states and the people.

I am alarmed at the state of the union. I believe the 2nd Amendment to be the lynchpin of the Bill of Rights. I believe the Bill of Rights to be under continuous assault both from without and from within the government. I believe that the enemies of our freedoms, many of whom have the best of intentions (they want to be good rulers and the road to hell is paved with good intentions) also believe that the 2nd Amendment is the lynchpin of the Bill of Rights. They have no choice but to attempt to disarm us to achieve their vision of what America should be. Will it happen in this generation? Only God knows. But either the people who have a vision for America contrary to the Bill of Rights will be defeated...or they will attempt to disarm all Americans. They have no alternative if they would be victorious.


"One of the greatest blessings of virtue is the contempt of death. He who has learned how to die has unlearned how to serve. To be ready to die frees us from all bondage and and thralldom."

Montaigne, Essays
 
Hmmm, gee whiz, guys. A regular police force would never be able to take up the guns from a resisting populace. The police would have to train in military tactics, have military (I gotta say it..) "ASSAULT WEAPONS" and things like armored personnel carriers and tanks. Gee whiz, guys, where do you think you live? Communism and Socialism are dead! Now that we can live in peace, guns are our ONLY threat to "the good life".

("Nuts!")

--------

Talking about all this with my 22 y/o daughter (yesterday), she became very quiet. A little later she asked, "Dad, I know I can handle the .223 fairly well. Do you think I could learn to handle the .30-06?"

Ed,
"Good" city kids might turn in their guns as the gov't requires. "Bad" kids probably wouldn't.

Many (Most?) kids in the country (the "provincials") feel much as we do. "Don't Tread On Me" and "Come and Get It!" seem to be the attitude out here.

I'm so damned proud of these kids. Many of them are future TFL folks. They're just pre-occupied with their new-found freedoms and their hormones. Weren't we all? (At their age? Some of us still, maybe?? :D)
 
I feel the same way as most of U "they will only get my gun one bullet at a time." The onlt problem with that is it probably will not happen that way. The day will probably never come any time soon in America when the cops go door to door to collect firearms. If this happen the "one bullet at a time" senerio would take effect and the policy would soon be changed. I see it happening more this way, they have already (for the most part) taken machine guns from the American people, now they are after and have basically succeded in semi-auto bans. After all semi-auto's are banned the they will have to ban handguns, after all a handgun is only good for putting a man six feet in a hole. Then they will move on to High powered "Deadly Sniper Rifles" cappable of creating human carnage at extremly long range. After the American populace is down to nothing but shotguns, then they too will be targeted as "Weapons of mass destruction" ,even black powder will not be safe(works great in bombs). At this piont then the feds may go door to door , are U going to stop them with your single shot .22 with your allotted 10 rounds of ammo? This if it happens would take a very long time to meke society get used to the change, kinda like the Fabian society thing years ago in England.
My $.02 worth
Later
Daren
 
I enjoyed your post, and am now mulling over its message and heeding its warnings.

Also, I admire your honesty, but I say until proven otherwise, that quote from Hitler is as good as gold. Although you are right about history, the constitution, and prudential arguments all weighing in favor of gun rights, "the people" are unfortunately, morons, and if we don't utilize the same tactics as the socialists to sway them, we will not prevail. I am willing to be a liar and hypocrite (or at least head in the sand on this issue) to saved my country from the anti-freedom fighters.

And don't get too high on Rhenquist. The 90s court, while maintaining some liberties and ruling mostly for the good, has continued to trample on fourth amendment search and seizure rights, for the sake of the "war on drugs" (though not explicitly stated). That is the drawback of "conservatism". The '96 Lopez case is actually the first case in over 60 years to strike as unconst an act of Congress as overstepping their "commerce clause" authority (thank God), since I believe Lochner vs. New York. From the Schecter Poultry case on (late 30s), the commerce clause was interpreted wrongly (too broadly).

BTW, I had seen this board before (TFL), but today is the first day I've spent a lot of time here. I have to say that the posts here are incredibly thoughtful and informative. I suspect I'll be spending most all of my free time here, provided I don't get censored like I did at Glock Talk. In fact, I've already changed my browser to make this my "home". And as soon as I figure out how to change my username, you'll know me as "Got Glock" instead of "DanOK".

[This message has been edited by DanOK (edited 02-12-99).]
 
Welcome to TFL DanOK I liked your post, but I differ in opinion on one issue, I really do not feel that the "people" are morons, just misinformed. How could they not be?(in many cases)The anti-gun media has a firm hold on the info that the general public receives. We know better because we have a passion for fine firearms, but to Joe citizen gun-control is for the other guy, I feel most people are not aware of the danger to their freedoms. For example in one of my college classes we were discussing firearms ownership. One lady said she never felt the need for a gun,but if she felt she needed one she would just go buy it. I told her I hoped she was always allowed that freedom but if things don't change then I stood on my soapbox and yada,yada,yada...... My point is the lady was not a moron so to speak, just took it for granted she would have acces to firearms, after all she had never done anything wrong.........
Later
Daren
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top