19 April, 1775?

[armedandsafe]

It is starting all over again. 1775 revisited.
You are criminals. I know that is true because a Democrat told me so.

Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out | Politics

Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.

Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, Hi-Point20Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927 Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with detachable magazine, SLG 95, SLR 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12,
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

Shortly after the "It's a CRIME, Bill" passed I gave a little talk to some FBI agents. I had a little .22 rifle with me. It used a detachable magazine which held 7 rounds. A training rifle for kids, it had a stock which could be adjusted in length by pushing a button and pulling or pushing on the shoulder pad. While I was talking, I demonstrated this to the FBI agents. Then, I took an empty .22 ammo box and tore off one flap end. I took the remaining box and taped it to the muzzle of my rifle, as a flash hider.

Suddenly, I was holding an "ASSAULT RIFLE!" I was in possession of an evil crime causer! This evil thing was about to go crazy and kill everybody in the room, while laughing gleefully.

Oh, it was made by DAISY .

Pops

Read More

 

[Flyingswords]

They can piss off for all I care. A list means nothing to me. I will uphold the 2nd Amendment and no one else can tell me how to uphold it contrary to our US Constitution. As Ted Nugent says in an interview, the 2nd Amendment is my carry permit.

 

[deen_ad]

They can piss off for all I care. A list means nothing to me. I will uphold the 2nd Amendment and no one else can tell me how to uphold it contrary to our US Constitution. As Ted Nugent says in an interview, the 2nd Amendment is my carry permit.

I wish Constitutional carry was legal EVERYWHERE. I'm too old and broke to be a test case though, until then I'll have to keep renewing my WA and OR permits.

 

[Mark W.]

Would you like your tin foil hat in a traditional fold or would the Johnny Depp Capt. Sparrow Pirates style suit you better?

We can have either folded up and sent you via carrier pidgeon or pony express. We know how much the Post Offices Chem trails bother your skin.

 

[mjbskwim]

If you are really going to wear a tin hat,how 'bout this.

They will want us to keep our guns and get as many as possible

Until they are ready to send us all to the concentration camps.
We will be heavily armed.
They will need to be also.They can then come with tanks

Hey just something to cook under the foil.

 

[PuddleMonkey]

Before It's News is known for being a gossip rag, so have any legitimate news sources confirmed this?

 

[8ball]

The article was posted in February 2009 if you follow the links. Alan Korwin loves a good viral story that promotes his website and his books.

In other news from 2009, I hear that new James Cameron movie Avatar is going to be great, and I'm looking forward to the Michael Jackson comeback tour.

 

[Sling Blade]

OP is off a day too:

Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.

 

[armedandsafe]

OP is off a day too:

Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.

Battles of Lexington and Concord - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the first military engagements of the American Revolutionary War.[9][10] They were fought on April 19, 1775, in Middlesex County, Province of Massachusetts Bay, within the towns of Lexington, Concord, Lincoln, Menotomy (present-day Arlington), and Cambridge, near Boston. The battles marked the outbreak of open armed conflict between the Kingdom of Great Britain and its thirteen colonies in the mainland of British North America.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hr1022/text

Pops

 

[Sling Blade]

Battles of Lexington and Concord - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pops

My apologies - didn't read enough meaning into the date on your post.

 

[Burt Gummer]

My sig explains how they will slowly take guns away. The boiling frog syndrome, not an all-out gun grab.

Here's How it Will be Done...
By Eric Peters
November 25th, 2012

Incrementalism has proved depressingly effective as a tool for getting most people to quietly surrender their rights piecemeal. For gradually habituating them to an ever-diminishing circle of liberty. When the circle finally closes and their rights no longer exist at all, they hardly notice – because by that time, most of their rights have already been taken.

The final surrender is met with a shrug rather than a scream of outrage.

Think how Americans have been habituated to arbitrary search and seizure. Something like the TSA would simply not have been tolerated if it came out of the blue sky circa 1980. And no, the terrr attacks of nineleven did not "change everything." Getting people to accept "sobriety checkpoints" beginning around 1980 changed everything. Accept that – and something like Gate Rape is inevitable.

The same process works just as well when it comes to dismantling due process – and removing limits on what the government may not do to us. We didn't get to legal strip searches for jaywalking or littering in one fell swoop. Nor rendition, torture as policy – and presidential kill lists. It is a matter of getting them – getting us – to tolerate "A" so that "B" will be accepted in turn.

This is how the citizens of the United States will be disarmed.

No sudden, mass ban or attempt at confiscation – because that would probably lead to open violence on a large scale and they – people like Dear Leader Obama and his Vyshinsky, AG Eric Holder, know this.
So, instead, they will first pass "reasonable"restrictions.

They will target not guns – just dangerousguns. So easy to demagogue anything with, say, a high-capacity magazine. Or which looks "military." Think how the ground has already been ceded by mainstream "gun rights" groups like the NRA – which invariably talk about "sportsmen" and "hunting." Who needs an AR-15 (or Sig 220) to hunt?
Open carry will be next. How many millions of Clovers would support a ban?

Next, they'll lobby for a new law (or just issue a fatwa) that makes it much harder to get a CC permit. Such as at a judge's discretion. And only if you have a "legitimate" purpose. Self-defense will not be considered a legitimate purpose.
But the big one – tied to Obamacare – will be the transformation of gun ownership into a public healthissue.
The assault on smoking (and lately, soft drinks) should have alerted people – but as with "sobriety checkpoints," most people readily supported the imposition of massive taxes on smokers because, after all, it is unhealthy to smoke. And of course, they didn't smoke. So their rights were not on the table (foolish them). They – most people – never see that an attack on anyone's rights is an attack on theirrights.They are easily gulled by their moralistic fetishes – their disapproval of some concrete thing other people do which they don't like. Not seeing that if the government can ban (or control or regulate) thisthan it certainly can ban, control or regulate that. The particulars don't matter. The principle is everything.
Thus, smoking has been anathematized – and rendered exorbitantly expensive to partake of. Not an outright ban – not yet. But ever closer, every year.

And guns? It will be argued it is unhealthy to have a gun in the house. There will be talk of all the suicides and domestic violence (red herrings, these – but exceptionally effective tools of emotional manipulation).
Inevitably, the children will come into play.
It will be argued that anyone who possesses a gun must also possess insurance. Just as car owners are required to buy insurance; just as we are soon to be forced to buy health insurance. The same arguments will be used – because they've already been accepted. Thus, just as it is not illegal to have a car – so long as you buy insurance for it – it will not be illegal (yet) to own a gun. So long as you are "properly insured."
That will be the first step.

The second step ought to be obvious. Legal gun ownership will rendered increasingly unaffordable.
As with collectivized car and health insurance, the insurance you will be forced to buy in order to keep a gun will be based on the costs imposed by the collective. It will not matter that you handle your gun safely. Because others have not, you will be made to pay.
People can afford to buy a $500 rifle or pistol. How many will be able to afford paying $500 a year to lawfully keep that rifle or pistol? How many will be able to afford keeping more than one rifle or pistol? Can you see where this is headed? Is it not brilliant in its subtlety?
Insurance costs have already proved their effectiveness at limiting the number of vehicles the average person can afford to keep. I've written before about the effect mandatory insurance has had on hobbyists. It used to be easy (and legal) to keep a "parts car" or "project car" because other than the costs of buying it and fixing it up, there were no other costs. So long as you didn't put it on the road, you didn't have to insure it. In numerous areas around the country, you must now keep valid tags – and insurance – on every single vehicle, even those kept in a garage or in your back yard. If not, the vehicle is subject to confiscation.
Exactly the same tactics will be deployed against firearms. And it will be impossible to fight – because the fight over the principle was lost long ago. How will anyone argue against mandatory gun insurance when they have already accepted mandatory car insurance and now mandatory health insurance?

In a very short time, the government will have effectively disarmed most people without ever having had to push for an outright ban. The small handful of people who still possess arms will only be able to possess a few types and be very limited in what they can (legally) do with them.

Dealing with them will easy. Because there will be so few.
And because they will have already conceded the point anyhow.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

 

[Kimber Custom]

On April 18th (around 9p) Thomas Gage started the process of sending troops to Concord to capture provisional powder supplies. The first shots at Lexington Green happened around 7a April 19th. The war didn't begin in earnest until Meriam's Corner around 12:30p. (Come to an Appleseed and we'll tell you all about it).

I expect modern gun control to come about in much the same way. A tax on ammunition & powder followed by EPA restrictions on shooting ranges and public lands. Once you make it cost prohibitive to shoot and there's no place *to* shoot then the guns simply dry up and go away. No pesky 2nd amendment issues to deal with that way.

 

[theminutemenrideagain]

What they are going to do is give you a solid deadline to turn in all "Dangerous Firearms" and while they do that what they will do is make stores pull the ammunition of the shelves along with any other guns that they dont approve of and once the people FINALLY figure out that bubblegum is going down it will be to late to get guns or ammo, you wait and see that what they are going to do is pull ammunition cause they will pass the bill and declare marshall law and people are going to be screwed at that point, and a gun without ammo is worthless . I expect this to happen within the next 2-3 years if our economy can hold out that long which is very doubtful and then the chinese will be the problem, and the worse part is the SHEEPLE of this country are going to do just as there told cause it will be "ILLEGAL" to not comply with the GOVT.

IF YOU DONT STAND FOR SOMETHING THAN YOU WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING

 

[Beefcake]

What they are going to do is give you a solid deadline to turn in all "Dangerous Firearms" and while they do that what they will do is make stores pull the ammunition of the shelves along with any other guns that they dont approve of and once the people FINALLY figure out that bubblegum is going down it will be to late to get guns or ammo, you wait and see that what they are going to do is pull ammunition cause they will pass the bill and declare marshall law and people are going to be screwed at that point, and a gun without ammo is worthless . I expect this to happen within the next 2-3 years if our economy can hold out that long which is very doubtful and then the chinese will be the problem, and the worse part is the SHEEPLE of this country are going to do just as there told cause it will be "ILLEGAL" to not comply with the GOVT.

IF YOU DONT STAND FOR SOMETHING THAN YOU WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING

I don't think anyone will ever come to our doors to confiscate the evil black guns that we purchased legally. There would be way too much opposition to this. I agree that ammo will become more expensive, and that it may soon be impossible to buy new hi-cap semi's, but the notion that the police or national guard will go door to door to confiscate personal property which was legal when purchased seems far-fetched to me. Plus, I don't think they could legally do so without paying fair market value, and I don't think the federal government has a lot of extra cash these days. However, there is a precedent set for requiring registration of evil guns (similar to the requirement to register all automatic weapons before March 1986 or they would no longer be legal to own or transfer - see FOPA 1986). This could become a reality.

I also don't foresee the time when many of us will be effectively disarmed because we ran out of ammo. I'm guessing that I'm not the only person on this board that has bought a few (thousand) extra rounds recently. If ammo becomes scarce, I'm sure not going to waste it, so I don't intend to ever be completely without.

 

[theminutemenrideagain]

I belive you are correct in some thought but when I say ammunition control I belive that it would be for the majority of the people once they start seeing what a dictatorship will become from the aftermath of gun control,then they will want to stand up but they will have no weapons to do so, the
people who have been prepairing for it and will be set absolutly