The straw that breaks the camel's back?
- Thread starter VaultDweller
- Start date
Wildalaska
Moderator
Which one? This one?
WildletmeknowAlaska
Wildalaska
Moderator
In rem or in personem
Never mind
They are expanded in terms of what is seizable (Foreign accounts) and why....
Never been a fan of forfeitures but they are constituional IIRC
WildofftoworkAlaska
Never mind
They are expanded in terms of what is seizable (Foreign accounts) and why....
Never been a fan of forfeitures but they are constituional IIRC
WildofftoworkAlaska
rem vs personam: confuses me, for sure. I would've guessed that if my money (rem) funds criminal activity, the my personam will be charged thus putting all of my rem at the disposal of the courts. Makes my forehead bleed, but I'm just a country boy.
Forfeiture provisions cause me disquite but I don't have anything concrete. Local anecdotes abound of property lost through "possession of gypsum" that promise to gum up the courts for some time to come. One assumes that part of the reason a search of the act turns up such numerous references to "due process" in close proximity to "forfeiture" is that the authors were also concerned with abuse.
When I see that many references to "due process" it's sets off my "pony" alarm. For those unfamiliar with a "pony alarm" it works like this:
Young lad comes downstairs on Christmas morning and finds the living room full of horsecrap. He exclaims and claps excitedly.
When asked why he's so happy he explains: "With that much horsecrap, there must be a pony somewhere."
Hence, I get the impression that there will be abuse of due process. Not very scientific but there it is.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled armageddon speculation.
[/thread drift]
Forfeiture provisions cause me disquite but I don't have anything concrete. Local anecdotes abound of property lost through "possession of gypsum" that promise to gum up the courts for some time to come. One assumes that part of the reason a search of the act turns up such numerous references to "due process" in close proximity to "forfeiture" is that the authors were also concerned with abuse.
When I see that many references to "due process" it's sets off my "pony" alarm. For those unfamiliar with a "pony alarm" it works like this:
Young lad comes downstairs on Christmas morning and finds the living room full of horsecrap. He exclaims and claps excitedly.
When asked why he's so happy he explains: "With that much horsecrap, there must be a pony somewhere."
Hence, I get the impression that there will be abuse of due process. Not very scientific but there it is.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled armageddon speculation.
[/thread drift]
"Trigger" is a better word.
Any number of things could trigger local unpleasantness
--Any number of scenarios concerning illegal border crossers // gangs
--Water rights contests particularly out west
--Kelo actions
--Collapse of the dollar
--Voter fraud on a massive scale.
Civil war is unlikely. Pockets of unpleasantness is easier to believe.
Any number of things could trigger local unpleasantness
--Any number of scenarios concerning illegal border crossers // gangs
--Water rights contests particularly out west
--Kelo actions
--Collapse of the dollar
--Voter fraud on a massive scale.
Civil war is unlikely. Pockets of unpleasantness is easier to believe.
jkkimberfan
New member
New Orleans proves federal police and national guard troops WILL shoot and kill American citizens, even on ILLEGAL orders. The order to confiscate everyones gun was an illegal order, but they obeyed it without hesitation. Americans have become so soft and weak, only a few will fight if the SHTF.:barf:
Dust_Devil
New member
Thing is that these days the U.S. isn't split into the "North" and the "South". There isn't a area of the country where someone can join and fight the "other side" because those who oppose each other in this country live right next door to each other.
So let's say a civil war started because of some gun consfication. Who are you going to join forces with? Sure you may have gun owning friends and allies who live amongst you, but it isn't like the whole city or state or side of the country would join with you to fight against another city, state or side of the country.
If there was going to be a nationwide confiscation of guns it would be by government forces taking them away from the civilians.
With the fact that the government already be more powerful and having those anti-gun civilians on their side, you would never win that war.
The only thing you could pray for is if the majority or all of the military and law enforcement chose to actually did what they are supposed to do and serve the people and protect the rights of the people and took your side rather than worring about obeying orders from political leaders or commanding officers who infringe on the rights of people.
That is something I would really like to know.
So let's say a civil war started because of some gun consfication. Who are you going to join forces with? Sure you may have gun owning friends and allies who live amongst you, but it isn't like the whole city or state or side of the country would join with you to fight against another city, state or side of the country.
If there was going to be a nationwide confiscation of guns it would be by government forces taking them away from the civilians.
With the fact that the government already be more powerful and having those anti-gun civilians on their side, you would never win that war.
The only thing you could pray for is if the majority or all of the military and law enforcement chose to actually did what they are supposed to do and serve the people and protect the rights of the people and took your side rather than worring about obeying orders from political leaders or commanding officers who infringe on the rights of people.
That is something I would really like to know.
Hugh Damright
New member
I think it was also true during the Civil War that it turned neighbor against neighbor and brother against brother. Yet there was a North/South division and I believe it still exists. I already showed how the 1860 and 2000 Elections demonstrate how constant the division appears. I might also point out that it is these same blue States, Yankees and Californians, which elect Hillary, Lautenberg, Schumer, Durbin, Boxer, Feinstein ... the folks living next door to me would not vote for people like that. I can say with confidence that people in my region believe that there is still a North/South division.
Do any of y'all have anything to support the theory that there was once a North/South division but that it no longer exists? I know somebody showed a County level map as evidence that there was no North/South division, but for all I know, an 1860 County map would have appeared the same way.
Straw that broke the camels back
I live in OR,the state with the highest per capita gun ownership,and that doesn't include blackmarket owened by gangbanger guns.We have a decent ccw program here,although it can be pulled nonviolent crimes like DUII and possesion of pot,and unpaid traffic fines can prevent you from buying a weapon from an F.F.L. through the background check.Lot of gun owners here,though most don't see whats going on.Like how the chair of the state Republican party used to chair of the Democratic party and helped pass gun control laws on both sides yet gets an A rateing from the NRA.Obsereving this makes me fear that it doesn't matter if a straw breaks the camels back,because the camel is already dead.By the analogy if the statist win the camel they get nothing.A nation of men with thier balls cut off can acomplish little and a nation of "strong women"that do nothing but dream of enforced equality and waste our resourses at every whim will become bankrupt in a short time.Look at the red and blue map a few pages back and you will see a very divided state.One of those who vote for a living and those that work work for a living.Those who want to keep and protect what is thiers,and those who believe that private property is "social injustice".In OR the commie types might have the votes and the numbers but they don't have the arms or the balls or the brains.If just the the head of the camel survives the owner will get a face full of spit,and thats the only sense he can effectively use.
I live in OR,the state with the highest per capita gun ownership,and that doesn't include blackmarket owened by gangbanger guns.We have a decent ccw program here,although it can be pulled nonviolent crimes like DUII and possesion of pot,and unpaid traffic fines can prevent you from buying a weapon from an F.F.L. through the background check.Lot of gun owners here,though most don't see whats going on.Like how the chair of the state Republican party used to chair of the Democratic party and helped pass gun control laws on both sides yet gets an A rateing from the NRA.Obsereving this makes me fear that it doesn't matter if a straw breaks the camels back,because the camel is already dead.By the analogy if the statist win the camel they get nothing.A nation of men with thier balls cut off can acomplish little and a nation of "strong women"that do nothing but dream of enforced equality and waste our resourses at every whim will become bankrupt in a short time.Look at the red and blue map a few pages back and you will see a very divided state.One of those who vote for a living and those that work work for a living.Those who want to keep and protect what is thiers,and those who believe that private property is "social injustice".In OR the commie types might have the votes and the numbers but they don't have the arms or the balls or the brains.If just the the head of the camel survives the owner will get a face full of spit,and thats the only sense he can effectively use.
I was the somebody.
I have nothing concrete apart from some old studies along the lines of "how many people lived and died within 100 miles of where they were born in 1860 vs 1960". Also, I'd expect that the entire "south" 145 years ago was more homogenously agrarian than it is now. No "Research Triangles" or "Technology Corridors". Northern vs Southern states now have much more in common in how their economies are derived.
I believe a "North vs South" split would be a couple of orders of magnitude more messy than in 1860. We've all moved around far too much, and electoral tendencies of a state have squat to do with how your beliefs operated.
No proof, but that's what threads like this are all about: speculation.
It'd make an interesting poll, perhaps?
Not with a bang, but with a whimper....
In the past few years the gov has done serious damage to the 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments, and are even working on the 1st...And when was the last time you saw SERIOUS resistance(I don't mean isolated cases of a handful of people) to any of it...
By that, I mean protest movements on the scale of what we saw in the 60s (whether you agreed or not, at least large numbers of people got involved)...
In the past few years the gov has done serious damage to the 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments, and are even working on the 1st...And when was the last time you saw SERIOUS resistance(I don't mean isolated cases of a handful of people) to any of it...
By that, I mean protest movements on the scale of what we saw in the 60s (whether you agreed or not, at least large numbers of people got involved)...
I guess the real question is what would be the straw be that breaks my back. I am in my fifties and have seen our government do some real bad things but our system has removed those bastards from power and has allowed us a better life.
I believe in the system and as long as we can remove the evil corrupt politicians then I have faith in the safe future of my family. Democrat or Republican both seem as though the corruption will never quit but you can vote em out or the law requires some to leave after 8 years.
I am afraid a "president for life" would cause the camel to go spit in the eye and take what happens then as fate.
25
I believe in the system and as long as we can remove the evil corrupt politicians then I have faith in the safe future of my family. Democrat or Republican both seem as though the corruption will never quit but you can vote em out or the law requires some to leave after 8 years.
I am afraid a "president for life" would cause the camel to go spit in the eye and take what happens then as fate.
25
Every time we have the chance to remove them, we punk out, and replace the old crooks with new crooks.
"I'm not gonna waste my vote." Sound familiar? :barf:
People talk a lot of smack, but most aren't willing to back it up with action. If you want the sleazebags out of Washington, stop putting them back there!
(Note, this isn't directed at Model25 as I don't know how he votes. I'm just sayin'.)
The system that was not meant to be invincible when the majority of the citizens no longer care about the founding principles of this country. Corrupt politicians can only be removed when the people view them as corrupt and want them removed.
If you believe in the system just because the electoral mechanism is intact, you'll be believing in it up until the moment it collapses, at which point it'll be broken beyond any hope of repair.
If you believe in the system just because the electoral mechanism is intact, you'll be believing in it up until the moment it collapses, at which point it'll be broken beyond any hope of repair.
Yes I will believe until it collapses and if it so happens it goes beyond repair then I will fight to adapt so my family can go on. Things change, they always have and always will. That is why you should enjoy life for the moment. Life changes for all of us over our life span and so it should.
We should however try to maintain those things that we need to preserve our way and guns are the key.
25
Yes I will believe until it collapses and if it so happens it goes beyond repair then I will fight to adapt so my family can go on. Things change, they always have and always will. That is why you should enjoy life for the moment. Life changes for all of us over our life span and so it should.
We should however try to maintain those things that we need to preserve our way and guns are the key.
25
IndianaDean
New member
Any event that erupts the power supply and disconnects Americans from their wonderful television will probably spark a war. Otherwise, they'll continue to sit in front of it like zombies.