Unregistered
Moderator
Really? There were several references to the Revolutionary war and armed rebellion in the preceding posts.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
would paulites support fred?
- Thread starter bigshooter
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Really? There were several references to the Revolutionary war and armed rebellion in the preceding posts
There is a world of difference between saying 'I want to do this' and saying 'at some time in the future if all these conditions were present...'
Apples and oranges.
Unregistered
Moderator
I think it would depend on how the government interprets your threat. All talk about revolution is talk about something that will happen in the future. If the government thinks you are seriously a threat, they are probably going to take a special interest in you, whether or not your particular criteria for violent action has been met. The government watches people closely it considers a threat to its authority. But its a moot point. Internet forums are full of people who say they would die for freedom, yet have never even written their congressman a letter.
I think it would depend on how the government interprets your threat. All talk about revolution is talk about something that will happen in the future. If the government thinks you are seriously a threat, they are probably going to take a special interest in you, whether or not your particular criteria for violent action has been met. The government watches people closely it considers a threat to its authority. But its a moot point. Internet forums are full of people who say they would die for freedom, yet have never even written their congressman a letter.
This is a settled area of constitutional law. It has been for quite some time. The governments "perception" is irrelevant.
Unregistered
Moderator
So you don't think the government has people it watches for signs of revolutionary activity?
I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to say.
I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to say.
So you don't think the government has people it watches for signs of revolutionary activity?
I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to say
Unless you are arab and have an interest in blowing thing up, no I don't think the government has any interest in you. They don't have the resources to monitor stuff like this. Even if they did every single statement here is constitutionally protected because no one here is advocating that someone should go out tomorrow and start shooting.
As a matter of fact, I have broken many gun laws in the past, as well as other laws that I felt were tyrannical. There is no need for me to say which ones on the Internet. To me, a conflict is a last resort, but it IS an option.STAGE 2 said:And this is a steaming load of horse puckey. Are you constructing machine guns in your basement? Have you sold a gun through the mail without going through an ffl? Did you buy any hi-caps during the AWB? Im serious. Show me that you are "worthy" of gun rights under your own standard.
Many people break federal laws and even post videos on YouTube. For example, look at all the videos there of people making and using homemade explosives. Here are just a couple:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhZEeUsTrNM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMf8DbZAD6Y
Evidently not everyone is as frightened of the government as you.
I understand that some are too concerned for their families to take any risks. Unfortunately, such people are essentially enslaved. The government is holding their families hostage.This macho internet BS is just that. Some of us have important things in our lives like families. As such, standing in the doorway screaming "say hello to my little friend" to the ATF or the FBI isn't a viable course of action for us.
According to what you're implying here, you would NEVER resist a tyrannical government, no matter what, as long as they threatened you enough. Sorry, but I find that pitiable.
Nevertheless, you're entitled to make that choice. Just don't make the mistake of assuming that everyone is like you. You keep "guaranteeing" that we who spit on unconstitutional laws are obeying those same laws. You have no idea what you are talking about and can guarantee no such thing.
You're welcome to think everything I say is bluff if you want. That makes little difference to me, since I know better.Of course this assumes that you and others who hold your view would do this which I can guarantee you wouldn't. Everybody is rambo on the internet. Things are different when SWAT is outside.
People have resisted tyranny in the past, and they will do so in the future -- even at the expense of their own lives. Those who refuse to do so are deservedly enslaved. That's the way it has always been, and that's the way it will always be.
Last edited:
As a matter of fact, I have broken many gun laws in the past, as well as other laws that I felt were tyrannical. There is no need for me to say which ones on the Internet. If I had been caught doing so, then I would have done what I felt was necessary....
Evidently not everyone is as frightened of the government as you.
Thats probably the funniest thing I've read here in a long while. You say that I'm frightened of the government and yet you refuse to talk about what you have allegedly done. I can only surmise if you have actually broken gun laws (which makes you a terrible ambassador for gun owners) then your reluctance to talk about them is only because you are afraid of the potential penalties.
I understand that some are too concerned for their families to take any risks. Unfortunately, such people are essentially enslaved. The government is holding their families hostage.
I see. I'm enslaved because I have no desire to see my family on the floor in handcuffs, or "mistakenly" shot by federal agents serving a warrant on my home.
According to what you're implying here, you would NEVER resist the government, no matter what, as long as they threatened you enough. Sorry, but I find that pitiable.
Nevertheless, you're entitled to make that choice. Just don't make the mistake of assuming that everyone is like you. You keep "guaranteeing" that we who spit on unconstitutional laws are obeying those same laws. You have no idea what you are talking about and can guarantee no such thing.
Sure I can. You aren't sawing off your shotguns or tying strings to your rifles, or making cans for your pistols in your garage. Its really that simple. And the reason you aren't doing it is because you don't want a nice long stay at club fed. The only difference between you and I is that I'm ready to admit this.
As far as resistance, thats ridiculous as well. You've wrapped up everything in this fascade of being a patriot, and thats just bogus. Patriots don't break laws in secret. People who do that are folks that just want to break the law. Patriots risk life and limb to make change. I don't see you doing either so as of right now, by your own words, you're just a potential felon who doesn't want to get caught.
Unregistered
Moderator
Now why would the government do this:
If this is true:
Either the government is watching potential rebels, or they aren't. Which is is?
I'm enslaved because I have no desire to see my family on the floor in handcuffs, or "mistakenly" shot by federal agents serving a warrant on my home.
If this is true:
Unless you are arab and have an interest in blowing thing up, no I don't think the government has any interest in you. They don't have the resources to monitor stuff like this. Even if they did every single statement here is constitutionally protected because no one here is advocating that someone should go out tomorrow and start shooting.
Either the government is watching potential rebels, or they aren't. Which is is?
The New Hampshire Constitution specifies a right to revolution in Article 10 of the Bill of Rights:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
June 2, 1784
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
June 2, 1784
Unregistered
Moderator
Unless your New Hampshire Constitution is printed on Kevlar, it won't do much good when the ATF kicks down your door, rapes your dog, and shoots your wife.
Either the government is watching potential rebels, or they aren't. Which is is?
You seem intent on distorting everything that is said here. One statement has to do with someone violating federal gun laws. The other has to do with someone making a legal statement on an internet forums.
One is a serious crime, the other isn't. Get it.
Unregistered
Moderator
So they are watching for confessions of gun crimes, but not for confessions of treason?
So they are watching for confessions of gun crimes, but not for confessions of treason?
So you are determined to distort everything here. The bottom line is that any statement here regarding armed resistance against the government is constitutionally protected because none are advocating an actual armed overthrow of the government. The fact that you even mention treason tells me you have no understanding of what is going on here.
Unregistered
Moderator
Well, yeah you are right... but I think a lot of my misunderstanding is because much of what you say is less than coherent.
Anyone who's afraid to (nonviolently) break gun laws, even in secret, is a terrible ambassador for the Second Amendment, which is the HIGHEST gun law.STAGE 2 said:Thats probably the funniest thing I've read here in a long while. You say that I'm frightened of the government and yet you refuse to talk about what you have allegedly done. I can only surmise if you have actually broken gun laws (which makes you a terrible ambassador for gun owners) then your reluctance to talk about them is only because you are afraid of the potential penalties.
As far as being afraid of penalties, obviously it would be stupid to break laws openly, as if the government didn't even exist. And it would be equally stupid for me to admit to everything I've done on the Internet (though I doubt they could base a case on anything I wrote here). Just because I'm not afraid to act behind Big Brother's back doesn't mean I'm going to throw my life away by inviting a conflict that doesn't need to happen. A little stealth goes a long way.
Would you walk through a dangerous part of a city with a fistful of hundred dollar bills, even if you were armed? I wouldn't, even though I have a right to do so. What would be the point in inviting conflict? Better to just put the money in your pocket.
Who says that if you were to resist a tyrannical government somewhere down the line, it would have to be from inside your home, with your family around?I see. I'm enslaved because I have no desire to see my family on the floor in handcuffs, or "mistakenly" shot by federal agents serving a warrant on my home.
You are enslaved if you will obey the orders of other men without question because you fear the consequences.
You have a crystal ball or something? I'm trying to figure out how you could possibly know anything about me or what I have or haven't done.Sure I can. You aren't sawing off your shotguns or tying strings to your rifles, or making cans for your pistols in your garage. Its really that simple.
So you think everyone is as scared to break "the law" as you are. You're completely convinced of this (in spite of the videos I just showed you that prove you wrong). Very well -- continue to think that if it makes you feel better about yourself.And the reason you aren't doing it is because you don't want a nice long stay at club fed. The only difference between you and I is that I'm ready to admit this.
So I'd be a true patriot if, rather than holding out hopes as long as possible for a peaceful return to the Constitution, I just went out and starting assassinating people? Sorry, but I don't agree with that. While I don't rule out the use of violence to defend my life or my freedom, shooting another person is the last thing I want to do if it can be avoided. In the meantime, I'm hoping that even if Ron Paul doesn't get the GOP nomination (which he almost certainly won't), he will awaken enough people to get the ball rolling toward freedom peacefully.As far as resistance, thats ridiculous as well. You've wrapped up everything in this fascade of being a patriot, and thats just bogus. Patriots don't break laws in secret. People who do that are folks that just want to break the law. Patriots risk life and limb to make change. I don't see you doing either so as of right now, by your own words, you're just a potential felon who doesn't want to get caught.
Originally, only property owners could vote. Today, we have too many people with nothing to lose voting. And they vote to take from those who work hard for what they have... Socialists like Hillary and Hussein Obama will take away our hard earned dollars and our constitutional rights. Sure, they complain about the loss of civil liberties because phone calls coming in from overseas to known terror cell contacts might be monitored.
Where were they when McCain Feingold silenced the people?
Where were they when Brady bill infringed upon the 2nd Ammendment?
I might vote for Ron Paul now, but will vote for the Republican nominee in November unless it is John McCain.
It is not a case of lesser of two evils. It is a case of how fast. Democrats will take away our gun rights in their first term if elected and enact confiscatory tax rates on small business owners and professionals, the very people who do most of the hiring and job creation. Has a welfare queen hired anyone into a high paying job ever?
The republicans will slowly take away the same rights over a decade or so and increase corporate welfare and grow the military industrial complex that Ike warned us against - Ike the victor of WWII and the orginal Cold Warrior.
Where were they when McCain Feingold silenced the people?
Where were they when Brady bill infringed upon the 2nd Ammendment?
I might vote for Ron Paul now, but will vote for the Republican nominee in November unless it is John McCain.
It is not a case of lesser of two evils. It is a case of how fast. Democrats will take away our gun rights in their first term if elected and enact confiscatory tax rates on small business owners and professionals, the very people who do most of the hiring and job creation. Has a welfare queen hired anyone into a high paying job ever?
The republicans will slowly take away the same rights over a decade or so and increase corporate welfare and grow the military industrial complex that Ike warned us against - Ike the victor of WWII and the orginal Cold Warrior.
Just out of curiosity, why do you object to McCain more than the others?XD40Tac said:I might vote for Ron Paul now, but will vote for the Republican nominee in November unless it is John McCain.
I personally dislike all the GOP candidates except Paul, but I'd rather have McCain in there than Giuliani or Romney.
McCain has personally gone after the 1st ammendment to specifically silence grass roots lobbying organizations that are the various groups like second ammendment advocacy groups with McCain Feingold because these groups defeated him in 2000 be speaking the truth about his record.
Did I mention he's a piece of garbage?
Did I mention he's a piece of garbage?
Anyone who's afraid to (nonviolently) break gun laws, even in secret, is a terrible ambassador for the Second Amendment, which is the HIGHEST gun law.
I can't argue with anyone who has logic like this.
No doubt there are people who work for the government that troll here. I also know for a fact that there are folks here that have worked in DA's offices and US attorney's offices.
Here's a piece of advise. If I were you I would change your IP address and pronto. That and update yourself what qualifies for PC for a warrant and what is non-hearsay before starting another conversation.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.