Ye cats. How in the h3ll do these freaks think they are going to do anything but be jailed and/or die...and for WHAT?
Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Ye cats. How in the h3ll do these freaks think they are going to do anything but be jailed and/or die...and for WHAT?
FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!
/this post is Mel Gibson approved
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Wow. After reviewing the information connected with this extremist, I now understand a lot more where some of these attitiudes come from regarding "Constitutionalists" and governmental overthrow. What a bunch of angry crackpots. This is heavy-duty sh!t these people are advocating perpetrating. They are as bad for the real gun rights movement as Beck and Palin are for the GOP!
The more of these off-the-chain wingnuts I learn of, the more I am sure I have chosen the right path for myself.
Man I feel bad for the bad press these headcases bring to non-extremist but still adamant right wingers like Quik. It's got to be like living with an insane ex-convict brother (with guns!) in your house!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Friday, January 22, 2010 9:08 PM
Labotomi wrote:
This is where I think the 2nd amendment comes into play. I believe it is there to balance the power of the people and the government concerning firearms. If policemen can purchase tactical automatic weapons, I feel that we should also, just to deter any martial law from being imposed upon us. I don't have a huge arsenal of weapons or ammunition, but I have enough to protect myself in a crisis.
.
Rememer that 1930's Supream court ruleing?
Thats what they concluded the 2nd andment was for.
Here is what Thomas Jefferson said
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Guess the old white guys that Earned us the great Nation we live it now where Right wingers too.
But that is how the "go with the flow" people thought.
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Wow. After reviewing the information connected with this extremist, I now understand a lot more where some of these attitiudes come from regarding "Constitutionalists" and governmental overthrow. What a bunch of angry crackpots. This is heavy-duty sh!t these people are advocating perpetrating. They are as bad for the real gun rights movement as Beck and Palin are for the GOP!
The more of these off-the-chain wingnuts I learn of, the more I am sure I have chosen the right path for myself.
Man I feel bad for the bad press these headcases bring to non-extremist but still adamant right wingers like Quik. It's got to be like living with an insane ex-convict brother (with guns!) in your house!
prime word in your post was extremeist. they are around on both sides of the fence. just beause they are right wing wacko's doesnt mean you should feel better about calling yoruself a moderate. that would be like saying no one should go to church or have beliefs of god because some priest raped a kid. or that your kid should never go to school because some teacher went berserk one day and killed a student. there are wacko's all over the place in every profession and every part of society we live in. you can't judge a groups reasoning based on a crackpot here and there.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Quote:
This short GIF animation is my analogy of Right Wingnuts interacting with their masters. You may guess for yourself which is which.
Here is something..
I thought it was a "wing nut" that swung both ways.... AKA a wing nut goes with the flow...
But I see what you’re going for, and if that what you want to call me for not only fighting for my (and your) rights, so be it.
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Why extremist views? Why not shout; "the sky is falling" while you're at it?
Let me tell one thing. (IF) the government decides to go against their own population, do you honestly think your fire arms will actually stop them? A country that has enough nukes to destroy the world 10x over and here you are with your deer hunting gun and you feeling like your balls are the size of bowling balls because you own such a weapon. Seriously, YOU WILL LOOSE. Yes, population can bring down the government, but thats when your very own strong military is not against you.
Do you really think the US would use Nukes against their own country?
How's our superior firepower doing in Afghanistan? They seem to be holding up pretty well considering the limited arsenals they are using. Plus look at the distribution and population of the US. It would be a logistical nightmare for the Armed forces to wage a war here with any chance of success.
I'm not advocating an armed conflict with the government. I'm just saying that change is coming at some point or another and armed conflict is one possible outcome and I plan to be ready if that is the case. I may not have a chance in hell of affecting the outcome, but I will hole up and protect what I have to keep my family safe.
sndsgood wrote:Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Wow. After reviewing the information connected with this extremist, I now understand a lot more where some of these attitiudes come from regarding "Constitutionalists" and governmental overthrow. What a bunch of angry crackpots. This is heavy-duty sh!t these people are advocating perpetrating. They are as bad for the real gun rights movement as Beck and Palin are for the GOP!
The more of these off-the-chain wingnuts I learn of, the more I am sure I have chosen the right path for myself.
Man I feel bad for the bad press these headcases bring to non-extremist but still adamant right wingers like Quik. It's got to be like living with an insane ex-convict brother (with guns!) in your house!
prime word in your post was extremeist. they are around on both sides of the fence. just beause they are right wing wacko's doesnt mean you should feel better about calling yoruself a moderate.
Oh no, lol...my friend, you are VERY mistaken. I am EXTREMELY pleased to not be associated with such madness, REGARDLESS of which extreme they come from. I detest tree-hugging "environmentalists" just as much. Don't allow yourself to make that mistake about me, or even in general...remember, there are more than two sides. We live in a three-dimensional world, not a flat plane.
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:Quote:
This short GIF animation is my analogy of Right Wingnuts interacting with their masters. You may guess for yourself which is which.
Here is something..
I thought it was a "wing nut" that swung both ways.... AKA a wing nut goes with the flow...
But I see what you’re going for, and if that what you want to call me for not only fighting for my (and your) rights, so be it.
Chris
Don't be an ass. If you associate your "fighting" with whack jobs like the insane maniacs in question here, then you are not fighting for MY rights. Frankly, I don't really know just WHAT you 'd be "fighting" for, but, as you offered earlier...you apparently need bad-ass weapons to do it. LOL, as if "armed resistance" is the key to the change you seek.
Nah. Leave me out of your "fights". You "fight" for nothing I am interested in. And if you think you somehow hold the spark of "freedom and democracy" in YOUR hands...you are truly lost.
And Chris...if you define yourself as a "right wingnut"...well, you said it, I didn't.
FACT.
A far superior military has never won against an enemy that has had the 'WANT' to win.
Unless that military has the hart to kill a lot of people; man, woman, and child a like.
And some how, I don’t see a group of people, that swore a oath the constitution, and its bill of rights, firing on us Citizens…. At least all the "wing nuts" that I knew….
Ergo, why DOD cops are taking over for MP’s... No oath, just a job.
Kind of like when Rome out sourced its garrison forces to the very people who sacked Rome itself… BUT that is a whole other topic.
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:FACT.
A far superior military has never won against an enemy that has had the 'WANT' to win.
Unless that military has the hart to kill a lot of people; man, woman, and child a like.
And some how, I don’t see a group of people, that swore a oath the constitution, and its bill of rights, firing on us Citizens…. At least all the "wing nuts" that I knew….
Ergo, why DOD cops are taking over for MP’s... No oath, just a job.
Kind of like when Rome out sourced its garrison forces to the very people who sacked Rome itself… BUT that is a whole other topic.
Chris
You're lost. That's all I can say. They've put a brain-eating worm into your ear. Like I said earlier...it must suck in there. To even associate yourself with this paranoid madness shows just how far they've dragged you down.
You've been programmed to hate, disbelieve, and suspect everything in your world, and you've bought into all of it. How sad.
Enjoy life, Chris. This sh!t will kill you one small piece at a time if you let it.
Labotomi wrote:Quote:
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Quote:
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
Quote:
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
---George Mason
Quote:
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}])
Quote:
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380)
Quote:
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" (Noah Webster in `An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution', 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))
Quote:
Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)
Quote:
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8)
Quote:
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
Quote:
"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion." (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775])
Quote:
"The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers. Only the government-and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws." (Edward Abbey, "The Right to Arms," Abbey's Road [New York, 1979])
It's mildly entertaining, and simultaneously pitiful, that of all these quotes you so vehemently believe in, the men who wrote all but one were born three centuries ago, and the only one who is from the last 100 years is, at best, a strange and odd person.
I might as well debate religion in today's society by using examples from the Crusades, backed up by a quote from David Koresh. It would be just as relevant.
If you could present some quotes or information that is derived from intellectual sources in the context of today's society and world, I could give it some weight. I'd ask you to try, however...I fear it's a fool's mission. But if you succeed, please present same here for discussion.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Saturday, January 23, 2010 9:10 AM
Labotomi wrote: Do you really think the US would use Nukes against their own country?
I personally don't think so. But since we were the only ones to use it in history and knowing the type of actions this country went in order to get what they want, nothing would surprise me.
Quote:
I'm not advocating an armed conflict with the government. I'm just saying that change is coming at some point or another and armed conflict is one possible outcome and I plan to be ready if that is the case. I may not have a chance in hell of affecting the outcome, but I will hole up and protect what I have to keep my family safe.
It isn't, why? After it is all said and done there wouldn't be a US population any more, it would be a ripe scenario for another country to invade and place their flag on this land. Which is why IT WILL NOT happen. With that being said, having military grade weapon (as some of you want) is paranoia at best, you can get your point across (personal security) with a 9mm. Shooting 100 rounds in 10 seconds, that's when we have to worry about you.
OHV notec wrote:Talk about perfect timing:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/tea-party-leader-arrested-rape
Ex-Marine turned revolutionary, check. Grenade launcher, check.
"Taetsch Z-24?" LoL
j/k ... or maybe not.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
ex - Marine?
No such thing sparkey
And Bill, maybe my point got lost in you.
All I am saying, is if I WANT an AR-15, It is not up to you, or anyone else (unless I am a felon) to deem otherwise.
Copy?
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Roger.
COPIED and pasted from earlier:
Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Yikes. Go buy whatever you want. If it has great big elephant-killing bullets in it, please just don't point it at me.
Perhaps read a romance novel instead of "How To Stage a Revolution". Give yourself a mental break. You've earned it 
The revolution will not be televised.
Hahn out.
This time, I will take my own advice. I, too, appear to have been on a fool's mission, for the only way to combat lunacy is with more lunacy (or, perhaps use great big guns n' stolen grenade launchers). Peace!
Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Labotomi wrote:Quote:
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Quote:
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
Quote:
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
---George Mason
Quote:
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}])
Quote:
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380)
Quote:
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" (Noah Webster in `An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution', 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))
Quote:
Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)
Quote:
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8)
Quote:
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
Quote:
"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion." (James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775])
Quote:
"The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers. Only the government-and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws." (Edward Abbey, "The Right to Arms," Abbey's Road [New York, 1979])
It's mildly entertaining, and simultaneously pitiful, that of all these quotes you so vehemently believe in, the men who wrote all but one were born three centuries ago, and the only one who is from the last 100 years is, at best, a strange and odd person.
I might as well debate religion in today's society by using examples from the Crusades, backed up by a quote from David Koresh. It would be just as relevant.
If you could present some quotes or information that is derived from intellectual sources in the context of today's society and world, I could give it some weight. I'd ask you to try, however...I fear it's a fool's mission. But if you succeed, please present same here for discussion.
The entire constitution was written a couple of centuries ago. Are you suggesting we scrap it in favor of a more updated version? The constitution works because there was some forethought put into it. It's no less applicable today than when it was written (excluding the
VERY few amendments.
There are few relevant quotes today because the same ones still apply. It simply works as written.
What is humorous is that you ignorantly disregard the opinions of some of the greatest people in history, the very ones who formed the rules that govern this land we live in. You, are the pathetic whiny bastard who think people can't be responsible with firearms . Why don't you take the time and try to come up with a constitution that is a thousandth as great as the one we currently abide by and the one that does not restrict firearm ownership in any way.
Yikes. I thought I was done, then you came back at me with an outright insult which, of course, ends all attempts at intelligent discourse. So...
Fcuk you. Go shoot something, hopefully something living so you can cum in your pants a little bit, you rotten, violent waste of human flesh.
There! Didn't that feel nice? lol. Fair is fair. So maybe I upped the game a little, but you wrote the rules, and I think I stayed within them.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Oh, by the way, a55hole...I am responsible with my firearms, as are most of this great nation's citizens who own them. You and your nutjob domestic terrorist heroes are the ones we all fear. Enjoy your descent into hell...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Saturday, January 23, 2010 10:46 AM
Moderato Electo Victorio! wrote:Yikes. I thought I was done, then you came back at me with an outright insult which, of course, ends all attempts at intelligent discourse. So...
Fcuk you. Go shoot something, hopefully something living so you can cum in your pants a little bit, you rotten, violent waste of human flesh.
There! Didn't that feel nice? lol. Fair is fair. So maybe I upped the game a little, but you wrote the rules, and I think I stayed within them.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Oh, by the way, a55hole...I am responsible with my firearms, as are most of this great nation's citizens who own them. You and your nutjob domestic terrorist heroes are the ones we all fear. Enjoy your descent into hell...
What domestic terrorist hero have I embraced or condoned. Which statement did I make that you've concluded that I'm anything but a law abiding citizen who happens to enjoy firearms and likes to plan for the worst and hope for the best? How many times have you called me crazy, nutjob, freak, right wing wingnut, wackjob or other insulting terms? Compare those with the names I've called you and then look deeply in the mirror and see who is paranoid.
You're the one who has to result to name calling and insults to try and make everyone who doesn't follow your line seem crazy. You have your opinion and I have mine, don't insult me and I won't insult you, dont @!#$ with me and I won't @!#$ with you, but if you insist, send a pm and I'll let you know where to find me
Nah. Never called you a name, nor used any of those adjectives towards you. If you lumped yourself in with the crazy, whack job, freaky extremists described and discussed in this thread, that's your own doing, not mine. However, I will admit the implication that you are the man in my sig, so the wingnut term does stick, especially now that you took the gloves off.
If you are denying ANY influence from the domestic terrorists shown in this thread, then we are all just left to wonder why your musings echo theirs..
You came here looking for a fight...acting hurt and confused now is LAME.
Oh, and calling me out. How cute. Will you be bringing guns? Let's skip the PM. After school, in the playground under the swings. Right where the bullies used to grind your face in the sand.
How childish.
One would hope. It was going pretty good until now.
Fact is, it's not a discussable situation with people like this. They are convinced that the world is wrong, and they are right. He didn't even pay enough attention to see that I am a gun owner too.
