House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte’s Comments On National Reciprocity Bill

Clearly I understand more than you do.

Sure I do. I'll make my own choices, and I'm perfectly willing to accept the consequences for doing what I think is right, and the snide little bleatings of someone like you alters that not one whit.

You go ahead and tell yourself that, Bubba. Guess we'll find out for sure, depending on what actions the government takes in the next few years.

Yep, this tells me all I need to know about you. You'll swallow any propaganda, accept any abuse of authority, acquiesce in the face of any totalitarian action, and shrug your shoulders at any atrocity committed by government, because you don't believe in anything enough to fight for it. Then you'll denigrate and slander those who have the courage to stand up for themselves to rationalize your own failings. Pathetic. I'm sorely tempted to name you for what you are, but I know the moderators would just delete it if I spoke my mind openly.

 

Obviously not, since you think you have the authority to determine the constitutionality of laws, lol.

you mistake ignorant opinion, with authority. You don't have authority, just opinion.

I'm telling you that.

you will do nothing, no matter what actions the government takes in the next few years.

These people refused a lawful order by law enforcement, and then took up arms against said law enforcement. They were put down, and rightly so. Had this been a group of young black males harlem, you would be cheering on the police for it. But since they were conservative nutjobs, you look the other way.

 

I'm not an intellectual coward incapable of distinguishing right from wrong and needing someone else to direct me.

Opinion is all anyone has, including you. If you think that someone's opinion means more just because they wear black robes granted them by the very government they're supposed to be constraining, even when those opinions are clearly corrupt and enabling totalitarianism, then I pity you. If your opinion is that you'll accept any abuse or enslavement because black robed government agents tell you that you must, then you go an ahead and hold that opinion. My opinion is that I have rights that are inviolable and inalienable, and I would rather die fighting to defend those rights than accept meekly being stripped of them.

And your opinion means exactly diddly-squat to me, and only enhances my contempt for your viewpoint.

You think so, huh? Well, sorry, but I'm not constrained by your ignorant, self-serving philosophy.

That is an opinion based not only on ignorance but intellectual cowardice and a willful refusal to accept fact. That you condone the cold-blooded execution of an unarmed woman who was no threat to anyone means that nothing else you have to say is anything but empty rhetoric and propaganda to defend totalitarianism and the murder of innocent people, and your clumsy attempt to play the race card is nothing but laughable in the extreme.

 

No one will have to take up arms against the government. The fact that there are millions that threaten to do so will be a deterrent against the government action.

Our government will never engage its citizens on a large scale. It all would be instantly broadcast on the Internet and international news. Any leader that would commit this act of genocide would be seen worldwide as the next Hitler, and his political party would be doomed for generations.

Funny thing about politicians, they like to keep their jobs.

The attack on our 2nd amendment will be much more incremental.

 

Ok. You still don't have any authority.

again, ignorance vs reality.

You are free to do anything you want. If you take up arms against a lawful government though, for your perceived violation of rights, then you are going to be swiftly put down.

I'm not giving you an opinion.

You have done nothing to date, which shows you will do nothing in the future.

Nope, it's a legal fact. They violated the law, and then took up arms against law enforcement. They came to the expected outcome. And as I said, if this had been a group of young black males in harlem, you would be applauding LE.

 

but there aren't millions that threaten to do so. It's only a handful of armchair soldiers deluded enough to think their assorted small arms will pose any threat at all to local law enforcement, let alone the US military.

 

Americans are a funny lot. Some may volunteer to incrementally surrender their rights, but try take them by force and they will rebel.

First, you’d have to assume those in Law Enforcement would follow edicts to enforce infringements on the 2A,
https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/gregor...fs-refusing-enforce-unconstitutional-gun-laws
Second, while many gun owners would acquiesce, if even 10% resisted, we are still talking somewhere around 10-20 million people, not a handful.
Third, it doesn’t take much for resistance to quickly form and bring more numbers to the game

In this situation, the Government blinked...

 

no they won't, and never have.

LE enforces the law. If you take up arms against the government, you will very swiftly be put down the law enforcement.

where are you getting 10-20 million people being 10% of gun owners?

the assorted small arms being wielded by the few morons who take up arms against the government would be put down within a day.

huh? Nobody was taking up arms against the government, or refusing to obey lawful orders. Then the idiots went and occupied a federal building, and some were quickly put down for doing so.

 

You are speaking from a false position and lack the wisdom and knowledge to understand it.
There are many recently retired Military personnel out there, and they still have knowledge and friends on active duty.
You fail to see this and many other important factors, plus you denigrate and insult and dismiss otherwise viable people you personally dislike.

A little objectivity goes a long way to development of understanding, knowledge and wisdom.

 

what false position? What lack of wisdom? I don't denigrate or insult people I dislike or disagree with. Don't mistake my pointing out the crazy viewpoints of the extreme right gun nuts/anti government types make the rest of us look bad with me disliking them.

Everything I have stated in this thread has been objective.

 

There was a study made to determine if various people could indeed, "push the button" to effect the deployment of Nuclear Arms, and there never was a satisfactory solution, even the Silos consisted of two Airforce Officers with sidearms, in case one decided to disobey a launch order, the other man was to threaten to shoot the disobedient officer, rather moot if the recalcitrant is determined not to obey disregarding his own personal safety.

The real objective here is not a rebellion against Government Authorities, it is a personal wish to have an option to defend oneself and loved ones from attack.
Sure there is not much that can be done in many cases of far superior numbers and weapons, however, in the main, not the true issue here.

The small issues need sorting out most, the larger issues such as Government gone wild will sort out too, sauce for the Gander etc......

 

Yeah, I do.

That's your stock in trade.

You never know. We'll just have to see, depending on what transpires in the future.

Yeah, you are. That's all you've got: deluded opinion.

We haven't reached my line in the sand yet. We may not. We'll just have to see.

That must be why they were exonerated in court and the government paid them a LOT of money to make the whole thing go away, right? Again, the fact that you callously dismiss the cold-blooded murder of a woman holding an infant in her arms who was a threat to exactly nobody as "the expected outcome" shows that your moral compass is all kinds of out of whack.

And you're just as wrong in this as you are in everything else. Quelle Surprise.

 

We aren’t English subjects.

If the Government removes civil rights and becomes tyrannical, many in law enforcement cannot be counted on to act against the populace. But, it’s unlikely you will see mass compliance if the Government is perceived to move against it’s people. Jade Helm generated considerable reaction, including the Governor of Texas mobilizing the National Guard to monitor the situation.

There is minimum of 1/3 population that are gun owners.

In the North of Ireland the few that took up arms (small arms and improvised arms) fought an symetrical war against one of the top armies in the world for thirty years until the 95EA; they were never defeated. Never underestimate what a few with assorted small arms is capable of doing.

Here’s what happened...this when one person was acted against. I suspect the handful of ‘the few morons’ as you call them, would substantially grow if it was suspected the Government was going to move against more of it’s citizens.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff

A repeated theme among posters is any major move against the population for confiscating guns and violating the 1st, 4th and further infringing on the rights of citizens could result in a civil war, not something most of us want, but is possible if the Government moves to undermine the Constitution and is no longer seen as a legitimate Government under the Constition. Such a thing would be catotophic; it would devistating the world economy. Even the Dems are not that stupid... at least I would hope not.

 

You of course do not.

Yes, I deal in reality.

No, I have reality.

Nope, it's a legal fact. They violated the law, and then took up arms against law enforcement. They came to the expected outcome.

I have yet to be wrong in this exchange.

 

Ok?

You can’t substantiate this.

Assorted small arms by a handful of armchair soldiers is not even a threat to local law enfoReckner, let alone the US military.

huh? Nobody was taking up arms against the government, or refusing to obey lawful orders. Then the idiots went and occupied a federal building, and some were quickly put down for doing so.

Nobody is doing this though. Which is why the cries for civil war and all this chest thumping by extreme gun nuts is so moronic, and makes the rest of us gun owners look bad.

 

I'm assuming you mean asymmetrical. The IRA's success, as a terrorist outfit, focused on attacking the City of London. And guns weren't at all relevant.

They did kill British soldier with sniper rifle, often aided by Americans. However, that was just murder. It achieved no political gain. It only ensured misery for the families of the victims involved.

 

You, of course, can keep repeating your nonsense again and again ad nauseum like a grade schooler. Doesn't change the fact that I will decide for myself what actions are correct for myself regardless of whether you like it or not.

No, you don't.

No, you don't.

And if it was a "legal fact" the government wouldn't have paid them a damn thing - much less a seven-figure settlement - and the courts you love so much wouldn't have exonerated them. Again, you reveal your true character with your approval of the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed mother holding her baby in her arms.

...And a guy strapped into a straitjacket in a padded room can scream he's not insane all he wants, and he'll still be crazy.

 

Law enforcement for the state of Hawaii is already standing down, and retracting its surrender orders for those who possess firearms and utilize medical marijuana, all due to public backlash. Why should it be believed that the federal government would be anymore willing to do otherwise?

 

Untrue. You underestimate the resolve of pro 2A folks. We understand that we will never have to fight against our government as long as we are one and we vote as a block. I am in the business, I know this for sure.

 

Our government estimates there are over 100 million gun owners. All polls indicate gun ownership is approx 40 percent. Google it if you don't believe it. Ten percent is Ten million. Our government knows this and will never start a civil war with its people. We vote as a block and politicians know this. They would have to repeal the 2A to even think about confiscation. There are far fewer people that oppose the 2A than are supporters of it.

 

And it takes just 13 states to block such a thing.
The 13 smallest states most likely to vote this down contain about 7% of the population.

 

You may incidentally have a few guns laying about the place, that is about it.
Pretending to be legitimate and at the same time, your false characterization of the majority of legitimate gun owners, personally grants you no credibility in any way.

 

It’s not a matter of liking. You simply do not have any authority to determine the constitutionality of laws. I’m just pointing that out.

Of course I do

Of course I do.

Nope, it's a legal fact. They violated the law, and then took up arms against law enforcement. They came to the expected outcome.

 

Nobody is taking up arms against law enforcement in Hawaii. I have no idea why you keep bringing Hawaii up. It’s irrelevant. M

 

Huh?