For the citizenry to take up arms against tyranny is the single most patriotic thing they can do, and it is their duty and right to do so. It is the last, and most drastic, measure to be taken, only when all other avenues of redress have been exhausted. It is not something that occurs spontaneously on rumors and conjecture. So, before one takes up arms against a tyrannical government, he must be DAMN sure the tyranny is ACTUAL tyranny, and not one manufactured by charlatans and hucksters. No law-abiding and peaceful citizen should ever feel the need to defend themselves from the police. In the case of Ferguson, if the police are summarily executing citizens, then that is tyrannical, and the People's revolt is justified, but only after they have exhausted all other legal avenues of redress. If, however, the race-baiting talking heads are exploiting the ignorance and frustrations of the people to incite them to riot, over trumped up accusations of tyranny, when none actually exists, then we have another problem.
I think you are confusing a race issue with a gun rights issue. The real issue with what is happening in Ferguson is not the fact that another young, Black male was shot (armed or unarmed), it was because a young Black male was killed in an area that Blacks do not control . There are no protests or riots by Blacks when one of their own is killed by the police or local thugs---when the local courts and government agencies are controlled by fellow Blacks. Thousands of fellow blacks are killed every year in places like Detroit and Jackson and Birmingham, but because "the system" is in their hands, there is no public outcry or rage about it. You see, what Black Supremacists like the New Black Panthers, President Obama, Holder, Sharpton and Jesse Jackson want is "justice" and what their version of justice demands is total control of Blacks where they exsist in any large numbers. This demand is no more obvious than the current demand for the police department in Ferguson to be ethnically cleansed of white officers. Black Supremacists do not tolerate minority Whites to be in control. This greatly interfers with their heroes like Michael Brown from being as "bad as they what to be"---robbing and choking people---and grabbing their guns. Do you say "Bravo for Black Power?"
Due to getting my hands slapped I will try this "opinion". If I could only have one firearm it would be a pump action slug gun(shotgun). There is a huge selection of ammo available, slugs, buckshot, bird shot, something for every application. Good for survival and self defense. So far as concealed carry I have a permit but almost never pack, except in my vehicle. If I am armed in a public place it is for MY protection you are on your own. Get your own protection. I have a cane or walking stick that I carry in public places. When out and about I practice the Grey Man Concept at all times. I personally believe that we have the Constitutional Right to self protection. Be informed that this post is an OPINION and is not a direct threat to anyone.
I'm all for the Black Panthers to be a presence in every city and to be an example of an armed and informed populace which is motivated to clean up the streets of drugs and government abuses.
Right wingers had no problem with defending right wingers when they stood up for Cliven Bundy is his ILLEGAL action when he evaded taxes. There was no government tyranny as paying your taxes is required by LAW. So where were the right wingers to condemn the actions of those right wing charlatans? What went on in Ferguson is systemic government abuse. The proper correction - an armed citizenry just like in Houston.
hahahahahahaha he didn't evade any taxes, as usual you r loose with your facts. IMO, he did what he needed to do, and he has a Right to do so as well as all of those who supported him, sincerely. Why is it Liberals are so anxious for blood to be spilled? God, what a blood-thirsty bunch of people
Those "fees" are taxes as we discussed and documented previously. It was treasonous right wingers who brought guns and aimed them at federal police. Why do right wing America haters love police abuse but hate federal authorities (that is unless they are used to invade foreign countries)?
but it was ok for farmers and merchants to point their guns at the King's Troops because of abuse of power, using military against the public, stealing and lying to cover up their own crimes (politicians, judicial, enforcement)? Don't worry about your position here, that was around during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. And it was bound to happen that some ideas about kingship would have followed through to this day and age. Why is it the Liberals don't want to leave people alone?
LOL Your laughable recollection of the Bundy incident needs revisiting. Even if you were truthful or accurate here, which you aren't, do you mean to imply that because the 'right wingers' did it, it is the correct course of action for this case? If there is 'systemic government abuse', then there are legal and peaceful avenues of redress that need to be exhausted before armed insurrection becomes necessary. The first step is examination of the facts to determine if these abuses are real, or just trumped up incitement to riot. If they are real, then replacement of the abusive agencies, and prosecution of any law breakers, is required. Only if there is resistance to prosecution and replacement should armed insurrection become necessary. When dealing with abusive government, armed insurrection and violence is NEVER the correct first course of action. The police chief is an ELECTED post there, if I recall. That would be the first course of action, in the event that he is not serving the people that elected him.
IMHO this thread has now gone way off topic. I think we can all thank Arphen for that. The thread poster has now been absent for two days.
On the contrary, you need to apprise yourself of the facts before criticizing. Bundy was engaging in illegal acts as all media reports clearly show. Aiding and abetting those actions by aiming weapons at federal officers constitute crimes as well. These criminal actions were ''armed insurrections'' and need to be punished.
not in the least.......by the way, what happened to your "avoiding taxes" statement? wasn't true, was it.....
explain to us in great detail how the average citizen can own a nuclear weapon...........facts please, not supposition. Anyone that equates owning a gun is the same as owning a tactical nuclear weapon has got a loose wire or two.
No need to explain anything in great detail since it's not supposition its very factual; wearing body amour will not guarantee your life in the event a tactical nuclear weapon is detonated close by; that was my point. Ownership has nothing to do with it; that's something you brought up in the context of your answer, not me.
Even if they don't have your rights - in 40 years they will, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. Doesn't that suck?
let's see...you've gone from guns, to tactical nukes, to body armor.... having a tough time equating the three?
true, but one never knows the future. Hell, the world can blow up before that happens..........hard to say, but they are after them, aren't they.........
On this issue, if you don't leave the US you don't have any idea how bad it can get. Smokers think they've got it bad - try living in an anti-gun culture as a competitive shooter or someone interested in armed self-defense. California looks like the lawless Wild West compared to Australia, the UK, etc. [Hr][/hr] For now we can own our own guns, but no doubt in the future we'll be limited to either "ownership" with the guns held at the range, or just range hire. People are absolutely insane on guns in a way they're not insane about any other threat.
fees are exactly the same - just given a different name in order to disguise what they are ---- and like taxes if you fail to pay you get penalized >>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<<
