Will you just hand over all your firearms if police ask for it?

How do you seperate , life, liberty and property?
I see all of them as being of equal value.
Love the Constitution, kill all those who defile it.
 
I believe mmike87 thinks that his guns are an intricate part of the "freedoms we enjoy" and "liberty" catagories, pwelsh4hd. Can't say I blame him - I would just hope my family would be safe and out of the picture in an event like this. It's a much easier decision to make when only my life would be on the line...

In a righteous world, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. I wish the world worked as it should :(
 
No, I would not. I would hide them if they were doing a neighborhood search. I would say they were stolen or lost or I gave them away. They would not get them.

If they insisted....I would give them the business end of one if I absolutely had to. But I would not be doing this alone. If such laws were being passed, I would get friends and neighbors together to back each other up in case some "force" were to come along and try this. Can you say Lexington and Concord? I knew you could :)
 
So you now you are dead!

I'm going to post what gun for defense against Zombie Doug thread.

As for your neighbors - you are living in a fantasy world common on the Internet. You've posted it before. Like TX is going to leave the Union and you want to sign up as Capt. Doug of the Texas Commandos.

Also, since you've posted this on the Internet - you are now identified by the Fed and they will probably just get you before the law goes into effect.

You are doomed, Wolverine!!

Go ask your neighbors now if they would they would join in armed rebellion against the law or NG if there was a national disaster? They probably would think you are lowering the property values.

Want a better solution, get laws passed that ban confiscation from law abiding citizens. Much better than ninja crappola.
 
pwelsh4hd said:
Wow...that's pretty bold. Is any property really worth you life? Family, friends, some freedoms we enjoy, perhaps liberty....yes, defintely. But property?


You view it as property. He views it as the government stripping him of his freedom -- in this case, by violating his right to his own property.

You listed liberty as among the things worth your life.
You haven't lost your liberty when the government comes to take from you what you should not have to give up?


Would you let the government take everything you had and left you without even a burlap sack to wear before you said, "It's time to fight back, they can't do this to me and my rights"?


Personally, I'm pretty sick of people saying that you should just be willing to hand over what you worked for and earned just because it's "property" that "can be replaced." So we should offer no resistance to robbers OR government agents who come to wrongfully take what is ours? We should hadn it over compliantly, and be thankful that we didn't have to get hurt for the privilege of surrendering what is ours?


-azurefly
 
Personally, I'm pretty sick of people saying that you should just be willing to hand over what you worked for and earned just because it's "property" that "can be replaced." So we should offer no resistance to robbers OR government agents who come to wrongfully take what is ours? We should hadn it over compliantly, and be thankful that we didn't have to get hurt for the privilege of surrendering what is ours?
Its because we are told that constantly by the media or other sources (brady bunch), if lies are told enough times peaple begin to belive them. How often do you hear "freedom fighter" on the news anymore?
 
Forgot to mention. If they did take them I would be at the courthouse the same day filing a civil liberties suit against everyone from the officers on up for violation of the second amendment.
 
Dunno, but I still don't believe any of my firearms are worth being shot over, and I subscribe to "law and order" is a good thing. If you are unsatisfied with a law, you have the right, opportunity, and access to the government to propose change. It cannot be left up to each individual to interpret, observe, comply, with these laws as they see fit....in a million different ways.
So we should offer no resistance to robbers OR government agents who come to wrongfully take what is ours?
You're honestly going to consider each of those circumstances exactly the same??? Sure, I can appreciate a little humor like that....but in all seriousness? "Robbers" the same as government agents equipped with court approved warrants???
The law is the law, and should be complied with by both sides....such as search / seizure requiring warrant, but should be complied with. Those countries I see reported with the most civil rights abuses, are those same countries with the most lawless society and lack of respect for such. You've seen them, people roaming the street with unauthorized firearms and machetes, committing social genocide and human rights atrocities. We cannot degrade ourselves and our society to pick and choose which laws we will observe, if we are not willing to participate in that process, lest we as well become one of those lawless societies we so eagerly frown upon on the nightly news. (How many of you honestly research & exercise your right to vote....I would hope many, but statistics show, and I suspect, few)
Don't get me wrong, I'm as strong a proponent of our constitution, bill of rights, & right to keep & bear arms as everyone else here, have my CCW, carry daily, and have a nice collection of small arms. But if so "legally" ordered, I would turn them over (under procedure documented in my previous post), and immediately begin the process under my rights to have them returned to my possession, as well as my right and obligation to propose and introduce change to the legal system.
If we begin to simply ignore particular laws we do not agree with & refuse to comply with legitimate law enforcement, we undoubtedly would see a complete breakdown in order of our society......most likely turning it into an unpleasant business full of persecution that most of us would likely want to escape as quickly as possible......our forefathers did so, quite successfully.
 
Last edited:
How do you seperate , life, liberty and property?
I see all of them as being of equal value.
Love the Constitution, kill all those who defile it.

Easily...they are spelled and pronounced differently for a reason :D
They are seperate issues, having nothing to do with each other, and should be treated as such......and it was the unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.....not the pursuit of property. If you are going to talk of and love the constitution, I think the least you could do is read and understand it. If we are going to talk constitution, we should know what it says and specifies. They are different subjects above, and why they were each mentioned in the constitution...not under a blanket statement. Please all, if you haven't already, take the time again to read and understand our constitution and bill of rights our forefathers wrote...it is worthwhile. I recommend this site:
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
Note particularly for this thread, in addition to reading the 2nd amendment on the right to keep and bear arms, the 4th amendment on search and seizure:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Please make special note of the words "unreasonable", "warrants", & "probable cause", as these are very key. This is how our forefathers treated "property". Now who does not follow or understand the constitution, and who are you reporting to kill if defiled...you casting the first stone??
As long as we're here...the 2nd amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Please note the words "regulated" and "state". The amendment / right makes no mention of unorganized vigialanties, nor actually any personal right to arms in an unorganized manner.....this is why we support NRA and other organized groups.
*Read and understand the context of "treason", as mentioned many times throughout our constitution. Heck, just read the preamble, as it succenctly identifies the constitutional intent in very few concise words.
*Why do many seem so bent these days to quickly kill and be killed anyway...jeesh???? The revolutionary war was something our forefathers agonized over, and should be respected as such......not a "let's go kill em'".
 
Last edited:
...and the act which ultimately made the colonists rise up at Lexington and Concord, after so much agonizing, was the attempt by the British army to seize the firearms from the colonial magazine at Concord.
 
pwelsh4hd, So we follow the laws and we will be ok right? Like the jews i germany packing thair things up willingly to go to an unkown place? And speaking of the revolutionary war the were breaking the laws to it was called treson.
 
Being as how I live alone,no family etc. And I have papers on 51 guns I sold on the internet this year, I'd say I sold them and all I have is this old 69 caliber flintlock pistol you can have.

If a LEO or agent needed to use a gun because something happened and he didn't have access to his, I would help him out.

If they wanted to forcibly enter my home and search without proving legal authorization there'd be a small scale gunfight at the 'Ol Man's Corral. I have nothing to lose but my life. It has been a good one, I'm 55 and the world's going to hell anyway. Why prolong the agony if some "official" orders want to help me go out with a bang!
I'm a law abiding, CHL holding american citizen. I'm not afraid to die defending my legal rights under the constitution.
 
Good luck with that :)
How about "United We Stand"

...and the act which ultimately made the colonists rise up at Lexington and Concord, after so much agonizing, was the attempt by the British army to seize the firearms from the colonial magazine at Concord.

Thank you! My point exactly...per the second amendment, ORGANIZED. Colonial magazine at Concord = Organized battery / armory.

pwelsh4hd, So we follow the laws and we will be ok right? Like the jews i germany packing thair things up willingly to go to an unkown place? And speaking of the revolutionary war the were breaking the laws to it was called treson.

Yes, the laws and the legislators we elect should be supported (if we bother to vote) ...wow a right wing republican thought!!!!.....you advocate otherwise?
Uh, if your post is totally in regard to Hitler and WWII, nothing regarding the holocaust was ever written into "law" or German constitution by the Nazi government....rather, communicated as the "final solution", and enforced by the specially created SS (even the regular german army feared them...created by a tyrant megalomaniac outside of german law, to carry out acts of atrocity as he saw fit). Your reference to WWII is so different from this thread of gun ownership as night to day. To even begin to compare the immigration to America and the American revolutionary war to the holocaust, is completely unequal and in bad taste. Please reread my post and reference to treason, then read the US consitition as the drafters wrote it, making particular note of "treason", its location in the constitution, its context, and definition.

If they wanted to forcibly enter my home and search without proving legal authorization there'd be a small scale gunfight at the 'Ol Man's Corral. I have nothing to lose but my life. It has been a good one, I'm 55 and the world's going to hell anyway. Why prolong the agony if some "official" orders want to help me go out with a bang!
I'm a law abiding, CHL holding american citizen. I'm not afraid to die defending my legal rights under the constitution.

As outlined in my first post page 1, such unlawful entry should be resisted to a point.....but what about the future and those you leave behind??? Your life is precious, especially considering what impact you can have on the future and the leaders of tomorrow should you live. Martyr impact is small and fleeting. Prolong the agony??? I just do not understand the "deathwish" I'm hearing a lot of here in regard to firearm ownership??? Outside of lawful action, shoot another individual in defense of a gun, denying them of their most basic right of life.....I don't think so. *Under the context of this thread and the constitution as written by the founding fathers...you would not be defending legal rights, but breaking the law, committing acts of treason, and forever damaging hopes of any private citizen from ever being able to bear arms in an organized manner again.
 
Last edited:
Doubletaptap, excellent post.

I'm only 34, and I myself feel that the world is turning into such a heap of dung that sticking around doesn't hold all that much appeal anymore for me, either.

Would that I could be a happy beast. But no, I am an intelligent man, and I cannot shut out the noise that is the chaos of the world, and that chaos does indeed make it a chore to try to eke out happiness in this existence.

I'm not about to do myself in, but if a worthy fight came along, I would not mind terribly if I had to fight and possibly die for something great.


-azurefly
 
pwelsh4hd said:
Dunno, but I still don't believe any of my firearms are worth being shot over


Even if they were coming to take ALL of your firearms, and the understanding was that it was permanent? :barf:


pwelsh4hd said:
and I subscribe to "law and order" is a good thing. If you are unsatisfied with a law, you have the right, opportunity, and access to the government to propose change. It cannot be left up to each individual to interpret, observe, comply, with these laws as they see fit....in a million different ways.


There are reasons to view a law as being wrong that are mainstream and pretty defensible, and some of our noteworthy founders implored us that it was our duty to oppose and refuse bad laws.


pwelsh4hd said:
"So we should offer no resistance to robbers OR government agents who come to wrongfully take what is ours?"

You're honestly going to consider each of those circumstances exactly the same??? Sure, I can appreciate a little humor like that....but in all seriousness? "Robbers" the same as government agents equipped with court approved warrants???

Please post a link to the "court approved warrants" that Ray Nagin's police and others were using to confiscate firearms in New Orleans last year. Okay? Thanks in advance. :rolleyes:


-azurefly
 
Originally Posted by azurefly
Please post a link to the "court approved warrants" that Ray Nagin's police and others were using to confiscate firearms in New Orleans last year. Okay? Thanks in advance.

???:confused:
Please refer to my very first post to this thread. I only advocate surrendering any firearms, in the presence of specific court ordered warrants. Under the scenerio of lack-of-law, I firmly support resistance. However, my posts "post" my first reply to this thread are in regard to those in the thread reporting they would refuse, lie, and and even harm others, even with the presence of lawful action.....fully in the face of the constitution fought for.
No, confiscated arms in New Orleans were not specifically outlined in written law, and should rightfully have been questioned (and not a call for bloodshed of the officers committing the confiscations....how do you think history would have read today had that been advocated and taken place).....but also as originated in my first post, you should check on the local "Martial Law" provisions of the state you currently reside. If you have not taken the time do so, I believe you would be surprised at the level of authority by the individual states above, beyond, and over the national constitution.....the autonomy intent the framers of the constitution had in mind of states rights. Right..wrong, I don't know, but that's for all of us to be aware of, address, and change as we as a group see fit.
 
http://www.usconstitution.net/declar.html

(pwelsh4hd)
The above link is for you.
Our Constitution and Country was created under the guidelines of the above document. I believe it's one you may have forgotton.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Amen.

kenny b
 
Back
Top