A manifesto of the defenders of one's right to liberty?

[Scarint]

http://westand.us/

"Declaration of Affirmation. December 13th 2014.

"We The People hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, each endowed by their Creator with natural, irrevocable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, Property and the defense thereof. As such, we re-affirm these birthrights for us and our posterity, refusing any and all attempts from those who would infringe upon them.

"We declare that the right of self-defense is natural. As the framers affirmed and sealed with blood, so we affirm that our right to keep and bear arms is granted by the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and may not be restricted in any fashion. We the masters of a government by the consent of the governed, armed and ready, declare to our legislators and fellow citizens that no act of government, nor vote of the public carries any authority to remove, dilute or hinder any of the people's rights. Not today. Not ever. We will no longer allow our rights to be altered, touched or approached. We stand and we call upon all creation to stand with us. We call on all officers and representatives to uphold their oath and refuse unlawful actions. We call for peace and principle, but we will not back down and we will no longer tolerate those who trample our absolute and indisputable rights. We pledge our blood. We will not comply."

I'm not completely sure what I think of this, myself. What are your thoughts?

Read More

 

[John Gault]

I think that in the real world of today that Gov. Kitzgobbler would deem your family "in danger" and PoPO will do a No Knock in the middle of the night and bust a cap in your bubblegum for having an opinion that's contrary to the agenda.... This only applies if you're an old white guy or veteran or you hold a full time job, otherwise you'll be OK...

 

[Gunguy45]

I'm not completely sure what I think of this, myself. What are your thoughts?

I think, hmm, that's nice. Now what? I mean statements of indomitable will and all that are fine and dandy but it's not like they actually Do anything. Certainly you're not going to convince anyone not already in agreement. Nor are you going to "scare" anyone into any change of attitude or behavior.

I've started a letter-writing campaign to the state senate and legislature to clean up the BS transfer language in 594. I'll let you guys know what I hear back.

I've also been talking very informally with some lawyers who seem to think there's a few ways in which this could be challenged in court. I imagine SAF and NRA are looking into lawsuits as well.

Seems to me that's a lot better use of my time.

 

[Scarint]

I'm thinking it may be used as a rallying cry, but then again, the signatures could be used to target "extremists"...

I agree that there are better ways to fight it, though this certainly might not be the WORST...

I know that Sen Hewitt (Dist 16) is talking with the NRA about how to go about challenging 594; and I've found a couple blatant violations of the State Constitution, and one that I'm not sure about...I'll be sending them up to Senator Hewitt's office when I can get more of them confirmed.

 

[Stomper]

4GW...

 

[Scarint]

I had to look that up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_warfare) but I think you might be right.

 

[Dave Workman]

http://westand.us/

"Declaration of Affirmation. December 13th 2014.

"We The People hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, each endowed by their Creator with natural, irrevocable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, Property and the defense thereof. As such, we re-affirm these birthrights for us and our posterity, refusing any and all attempts from those who would infringe upon them.

"We declare that the right of self-defense is natural. As the framers affirmed and sealed with blood, so we affirm that our right to keep and bear arms is granted by the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and may not be restricted in any fashion. We the masters of a government by the consent of the governed, armed and ready, declare to our legislators and fellow citizens that no act of government, nor vote of the public carries any authority to remove, dilute or hinder any of the people's rights. Not today. Not ever. We will no longer allow our rights to be altered, touched or approached. We stand and we call upon all creation to stand with us. We call on all officers and representatives to uphold their oath and refuse unlawful actions. We call for peace and principle, but we will not back down and we will no longer tolerate those who trample our absolute and indisputable rights. We pledge our blood. We will not comply."

I'm not completely sure what I think of this, myself. What are your thoughts?

After saying this, as "gunguy45" notes above, what then? Make a statement like this and you are virtually guaranteed to have somebody challenge you to see what you're going to do next, just to demonstrate that this statement is possibly a lot of nothingness.

What's next? Going to punch somebody out? Gonna form up and threaten to shoot somebody? Good luck with that.

Don't make hot button statements like this because once you do, you can just back the clock or calendar down until somebody deliberately pushes you into a corner with a "put up or shut up." You lose and what you stand for — the Second Amendment — loses too. And all other gun owners lose as well, and you get marginalized.

If one intends to not comply, that's an individual choice. People who want to become test cases, in my experience, are often about a half a bubble off plumb, and haven't thought things through.

The best way to go about challenging a law is not to be charged as a violator. That's a criminal case, and if you lose, you're convicted. How stupid is that? Trust me on this, there was only one Rosa Parks, and she wasn't interested in packing a gun, she just wanted a seat on a bus up front.

File a civil lawsuit. SAF cases that have been setting court precedents are all CIVIL cases. Otis McDonald wasn't a criminal, he was a model citizen with a legitimate beef. Dick Anthony Heller (Not a SAF case, but Heller was represented by Alan Gura, who now does major 2A litigation for SAF, plowing lots of new legal ground) didn't commit a crime, he was and is a model citizen who went to court to keep from becoming a criminal. Winnie Chan & co-plaintiffs weren't interested in wearing handcuffs to make a point, they just wanted to carry firearms legally in Seattle parks facilities.

Palmer in DC isn't a criminal, he just wants to pack a firearm for personal protection.
Rhonda Ezell in Chicago isn't a criminal, she just wants to own a handgun in the city and called B.S. on the city's unconstitutional handgun ordinance.
Michael Moore isn't a criminal, he's just an Illinois resident who wants to be able to carry a defensive handgun like the citizens in all the other states.

But throw down a gauntlet and you're begging for the wrong kind of attention.

 

[Gunguy45]

WHAT YOU SAID

Hoorah Dave, and thanks.

We all need to step back from anarchy here and do what's next, which is civil suits and legislative action. This IS NOT "4gw" time. Not even close.

It's a REALLY bad law with horrific consequences. Consequences I remind my more radical forum-mates, which were not intended by the vast majority of 594 voters.

Who here is willing to kill cops over a provision that SALES have to go through a dealer? Raise your hands so know who to put on the ignore list. You are insane.

I disagree with that provision, but it's a comparatively minor issue. I'm certainly not willing to go to WAR over it, and frankly neither are some of the most radical posters on here. They might talk a good game, but when the rubber meets the road, it's a good bet that they will meekly comply.

We DO have alternatives for at the least the most restrictive of 594's provisions. LOT'S of them. And none of them involve hollow, meaningless statements of defiance.

It's not sexy, and it's certainly not very emotionally satisfying to write your legislator a letter about all the harmless things YOU NOW CANNOT DO under 594, NONE of which were intended by voters.

You can fight hard and stupid, or you can fight hard and SMART. The smart way will get you somewhere. The STUPID way will get you dismissed even by people who otherwise might support you.

At this point, if you haven't written a letter to your local legislator and State Senator, PLEASE DO SO.

This is the best and fastest way for redress. And face it folks, we are not an anti-gun state. We can fix this monstrosity that the voters have passed. But not with hollow, meaningless chest-thumping bravado.

We'll do it by hard, boring and utterly unsatisfying lobbying and letter-writing.

PLEASE write your local Legislator and State Senator.
An email is better than nothing, but SNAIL MAIL sends 1000 times the message. Get your friends and relatives to do the same.

 

[Scarint]

Well said. Nice to see everyone seems to have a fairly level head here.

I've already written my reps. Sen. Hewitt is working on it with the NRA; Rep Maureen Walsh will oppose 594; have not heard from Rep Terry Nealey, though past actions indicate opposition to 594

 

[Gunguy45]

4GW...

Let me know when you're willing to take on all your local law enforcement tough guy. Because you'll not only lose, (read DIE) but you'll screw all the rest of us in the process.

Seriously grow the Hell up or SHUT up. Calls for rebellion over a really stupid law absent a pretty radical act are the actions of an internet tough-guy. -All mouth and no cojones.

You don't MEAN what you post. And you damn well know it. If you DID, we'd already be reading about the DEAD 2A radical that stood off his local PD.

So frankly, contribute something useful or you go on the ignore list. I have better things to do than tamp down the idiocy that you and people like you are trying to foment, (Without the testicular fortitude to ACT on it) to the great disadvantage of everyone else on this forum. Sit down and shut up.

 

[Scarint]

Interesting, I read his post entirely differently than you did, apparently.

I assumed he meant G4W is what the manifest was implying; I never got out of his post that he was advocating for G4W...this is why I prefer face-to-face communication sometimes...but just to be clear, I absolutely am not advocating any kind of warfare; I agree with everyone about there being smarter ways to fight this.

 

[Gunguy45]

Interesting, I read his post entirely differently than you did, apparently.

I assumed he meant G4W is what the manifest was implying; I never got out of his post that he was advocating for G4W...this is why I prefer face-to-face communication sometimes...but just to be clear, I absolutely am not advocating any kind of warfare; I agree with everyone about there being smarter ways to fight this.

Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_warfare

First hit on Google.

 

[Scarint]

Haha, I did. I posted the same link above.

 

[Gunguy45]

Haha, I did. I posted the same link above.

Wow, that was faster than I thought the internet went. -Silly me

 

[Stomper]

Wow Gunguy45, you're wound tighter than a tick-turd. You should have a drink, maybe even get a prescription for your anxiety.

 

[Gunguy45]

Wow Gunguy45, you're wound tighter than a tick-turd. You should have a drink, maybe even get a prescription for your anxiety.

First off, let me apologize for the tone of my response. It was over-the-top and more than you deserved.

Having said that...
Calling for open rebellion, which is what you did in a backhanded way, not only doesn't help, it just adds fuel to the antis who read this site.

You're not going to do it, so why call for it?

I am very concerned that we are being painted as radicals and violent extremists by the antis. A call for Fourth Generation Warfare, unless there's a big smiley after it, is fuel for the people we both oppose.

Regardless, my comment was over-the-top and more than the simple "4GW" deserved. My apologies and i'll try not to over-react in future.

 

[Stomper]

4GW isn't as simple as what you seem to be implying your perception of it is. You've been surrounded by raging 4GW YOUR WHOLE LIFE, right here in the USA. I was amased when the realization occurred to me.

The progressive/liberal/leftists have been employing 4GW tactics since the times of Woodrow Wilson through the 1960's on into today. Things ranging from (seemingly harmless) "counter-culture" movements (under the guise of "enlightenment") and Weather Undeground bombings (the violent side of 4GW) committed by BHO's mentor Billy-boy Ayers, through the infiltration and tearing down of our institutions, the minds of future generations, mass media outlets for the "systematizing of error" that gets people to accept evil as good, darkness as light, 3%er-Constituional-patriots as "bitter clingers", violent "extremists", and "traitors" who are out of touch with the "mainstream".

The pen IS mightier than the sword, but even you have to admit that the weeds need to get "cut back" every now and then, else you wouldn't teach defensive handgun classes, yes?


Here's a FACINATING read that may elucidate the overall context of my "4GW" comments I make occassionally.

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2013/04/tyrants-beware-4th-generation-warfare.html?m=1


FWIW, me and the wife know most of the cops and politicians in our town by name, and even socialize with them. Physically battling most of them isn't much of a worry, they will not comply either.