Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is very likely. I imagine there are plenty of foreign entities that would aid the US government in a time of crisis. Many countries including the US have involved themselves in other countries civil wars. No reason it wouldn't happen here.Let's say in a hopefully unrealized future, the mass of the West Coast States become ungovernable by Sacramento, Salem and Olympia. Will the powers that be have a change of mindset and become champions of liberty, acting in the people's best interest? Not according to history. In that event I can see a Chinese "peace stabilization force" being invited in.
Have you ever heard of Operation Resist Tyranny and it's basic theme of Defund Tyranny? The primary idea is to defund the BATFE, abolish it and give all tobacco and firearm violations to the DEA and firearm violations to the FBI while requiring that they slash the regulations by 25 percent.Speaking of, why not support defunding, since the agencies we would be defunding are likely the ones that will confiscate our firearms under Red Flag laws, etc?
Good observation. If weapons are no longer legal and the cops take them incrementally - confiscating those by gangs and street criminals, working their way up to people accused of domestic violence and figuring in all the firearms that will be taken via Red Flag Laws, a substantial number will be taken in a short amount of time.This is where most seem to "not get it". They will not need to come take guns as they are made illegal. As they pass law after law restricting what guns we "need" the ones that are now a no go will no longer be sold. The people who have one can keep it, knowing they are violating the law. They may never be caught. A few will be and they will be made an example of. Those who do not own one of the guns they made no go yet will say what they say now. "I don't have one of those, so I don't care". Simple.
Guys with gunsWhen the laws are passed and it's time to gather up the firearms, who is going to come for them. Is it going to be the anti-gun groups or the anti-gun politicians? Or is it going to be the government agencies/law enforcement? It seems obvious to me that it is going to be the latter. I don't expect moms demand action to show up on my doorstep and ask me to hand over my outlawed firearms. I think most will agree this role will be filled by the government.
Since the anti-gun laws continue to be passed shouldn't we be supportive of efforts to hinder those who will be tasked at enforcing them?
That rules out the Angry Moms and Penny Okamoto.Guys with guns
Theyre single moms for a reason.You mean the Moms that Demand Action might not like the action they get?
Well, obviously their Dads That Are Poor Spouses Because They Can't Please Their Partner (they are working on a new name, but still need their spouse's permission) aren't giving them near enough.
I agree with the sentiment. A citing source would be appreciated.
Kinda Prima Facia, innit?I agree with the sentiment. A citing source would be appreciated.
Kinda Prima Facia, innit?
If everything was just so cut and dry. The whole problem being the first clause of the 2nd amendment that no one talks about . The US had essentially disbanded the federal Army and Navy and was relying on the states militias until that became unworkable during the quasi war of 1798 with France. For what oh, 220 years or so the courts had pretty steadfastly interpreted the 2nd amendment to apply to the states ability to raise a militia. It really wasn't until Miller that any weight was given to the individual right to keep and bear arms and even that was in that was in the militia context.I think "...shall not be infringed" is pretty damn clear and as far as source, it's the Second Amendment.
Sorry - spellcheck did not pass the bar, and neither did I.That would be prima facie, but what you and I accept seems to fly over the liberals heads. If you took all of them together, turned their brains into dynamite, you couldn't get enough charge to blow one's nose.
Or ignite one small sized pistol cartridge... Say .22 Short...That would be prima facie, but what you and I accept seems to fly over the liberals heads. If you took all of them together, turned their brains into dynamite, you couldn't get enough charge to blow one's nose.
You mean this FBI? How is that a good idea?Have you ever heard of Operation Resist Tyranny and it's basic theme of Defund Tyranny? The primary idea is to defund the BATFE, abolish it and give all tobacco and firearm violations to the DEA and firearm violations to the FBI while requiring that they slash the regulations by 25 percent.
The prefatory militia clause is only a problem to those who want it to be a problem. What "courts had pretty steadfastly interpreted the 2nd amendment to apply to the states ability to raise a militia" for "220 years or so"?If everything was just so cut and dry. The whole problem being the first clause of the 2nd amendment that no one talks about . The US had essentially disbanded the federal Army and Navy and was relying on the states militias until that became unworkable during the quasi war of 1798 with France. For what oh, 220 years or so the courts had pretty steadfastly interpreted the 2nd amendment to apply to the states ability to raise a militia. It really wasn't until Miller that any weight was given to the individual right to keep and bear arms and even that was in that was in the militia context.