- Thread starter BPaulk
- Start date
Do they want to: Yes
Will they: No (They don't know who has what, save the few who sheepishly who complied) The people who registered will have their guns taken in a few years and after another random shooting rallies the libs.
The vast majority who are defying this "law" are the only thing that stands in the way of mass confiscation in CT followed by the nation.
Will they: No (They don't know who has what, save the few who sheepishly who complied) The people who registered will have their guns taken in a few years and after another random shooting rallies the libs.
The vast majority who are defying this "law" are the only thing that stands in the way of mass confiscation in CT followed by the nation.
nope
I agree I hope we can make it to the next election and get the senate back I fell bad for the gun owners of Connecticut.
No, but they are chomping at the bit to figure out a way to punish those who would defy them.
Read this earlier today, not sure how valid the writer is.
Connecticut anti-gun officials call for bloodshed - National Conservative | Examiner.com
Read this earlier today, not sure how valid the writer is.
Connecticut anti-gun officials call for bloodshed - National Conservative | Examiner.com
The handful of states that enacted tougher laws caused many others to go in the opposite direction. Kicking down doors would cause problems in moderate states where there is still hope of passing further restrictions.
Gun owners in CT are going to see an interesting good cop, bad cop show, though.
Gun owners in CT are going to see an interesting good cop, bad cop show, though.
G
Guest
Guest
Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list | Call the Cops
Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list
Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list
I don't think they will go door to door but I guarantee they will start making examples of those who get caught. Just cause the majority didn't register their guns, doesn't mean Ct will turn a blind eye because they don't feel threatened by the gun owners. They will make such a shit storm about it. All we can do is hope and prey Malloy gets shit caned and there is changes. By then, I'm hoping to be out of this shithole anyway.
Uh, wow. Go figure.
House to house search is out. Armed drones will drop bombs down your chimney if you don't comply.
Amazon drones!
I'm sure you're aware Tucker301 but for the less astute among us, the article you referenced is satire. Although I'm sure that there is plenty of truth to it.
Regardless of wherever something like this happens. Regardless as to the reasoning of why. Regardless of how many blindly agree with it. Regardless of anything; the root meaning of this needs to happen:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
If they do show up, they have chosen their side. Deal with it or live on your knees.
Do you think they will go house to house in Connecticut?
We, as Americans, can't escape history. Most people would rather live on their knees. And, generally speaking, it's a viable alternative to dying for the sake of property that you can't keep if you are deceased.
Last edited:
If they do show up, it'll first be at the doors of those who registered in which case they will be dealing with those who have already assumed the position.
When they show up, what's going to be your choice? What are you going to do?
Not holding my breath waiting on an answer.
Last edited:
Im going to play the devil's advocate here and say yes.
Not today, maybe not tomorrow, but sooner or later the wolves who call themselves politicians will want to secure their control and dominance and it will happen. Any time in between is just cowards, biding their time, looking for a way to force their paid servants to do their bidding. COUNT ON IT. Greed and lust for power are not rational things and chaff at being denied. When it all boils down to it its not really about Sandy Hook, or Columbine, its about controlling the wealth. Always has been always will be.
Not today, maybe not tomorrow, but sooner or later the wolves who call themselves politicians will want to secure their control and dominance and it will happen. Any time in between is just cowards, biding their time, looking for a way to force their paid servants to do their bidding. COUNT ON IT. Greed and lust for power are not rational things and chaff at being denied. When it all boils down to it its not really about Sandy Hook, or Columbine, its about controlling the wealth. Always has been always will be.
He's already made his choice. He lives in Alabama.
I bet a lot of dead solders would disagree.
LOL, touche!
It a sad day this is even a discussion.
Do you think they will go house to house in Connecticut?
[With apologies to NSW]
The only sad day is yesterday.
[With apologies to NSW]
Shit, y'all can talk that noise... I'll have warm donuts and hot coffee for the Police when they come for mine. Cuz they're only doing a job they were ordered to do. It's not their fault... gotta be hard on em.
A sad day is an unprepared day. My pop has been telling me that this day would come, for the last 40 years. If you guys can't adapt and overcome a situation such as this, you're right. It is a sad day..... I'm just busting some balls here but really, the day will come. Think smart.
They would have the choice to not violate somebodies rights...
'Round here we talk just like lions,
But we sacrifice like lambs.'
http://songmeanings.com/m/songs/view/94/
But we sacrifice like lambs.'
http://songmeanings.com/m/songs/view/94/
I've probably listened to that cd a thousand times and that's never how I interpreted those lyrics, but to each their own. I do understand the point you're trying to make.
When you are deceased, you don't feel the regret you will feel living on your knees. When you are deceased, there are no mistakes to dwell over.
No man who was ever killed fighting for this country wanted to die in the process but every one of them was prepared to. Every man that gave his life for this country would have preferred death to living on his knees.
If you never served in the military, you have to ask yourself which do you prefer? If you did serve, you already know the answer. If you saw a member of your platoon die right next to you then you have an obligation to make sure his death, and the others before him, were not in vain.
The way I see it, the Founders gave us a freedom guarantee in the Constitution and by doing so they gave us their blessing and the Constitutional right to use force if the Constitution and/or the republic was threatened.
I had no problem or guilt killing someone when I was in the military as part of my oath. Way I see it, nothing has changed except the ethnicity of the enemy and I am sure I am not the only person in this country that feels that way.
The first gun owner that fires on police, killing any number of them, when they were coming to confiscate his unregistered firearms will ignite the emotion that will end the apathy that plagues this nation.
“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
― Martin Niemöller
This thread reminds me of two Fredric Nietzsche quotes ...
"The rights a man arrogates to himself are related to the duties he imposes on himself, to the tasks to which he feels equal. The great majority of men have no right to existence, but are a misfortune to higher men."
"In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."
"The rights a man arrogates to himself are related to the duties he imposes on himself, to the tasks to which he feels equal. The great majority of men have no right to existence, but are a misfortune to higher men."
"In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."
Last edited:
How about you coming to my door and getting the answer first person.
Thanks for the input, I think I know how my mind is made up at this time. I am not much for binding over. Good luck to my firearm friends in Connecticut. I don't think they will go house to house but they will make life bad when they catch someone out of compliance with this law. I hope that person has the money to fight them all the way to the Supreme Court. Maybe the NRA will help with the first case.
Good Luck again Connecticut
Good Luck again Connecticut
This is what a Wisconsin Sheriff said about gun control.
Sheriff warns of second American revolution if gun confiscation laws pass - National Policy & Issues | Examiner.com
Sheriff warns of second American revolution if gun confiscation laws pass - National Policy & Issues | Examiner.com
I made the choice to hold my hand up and fight for the rights my forefathers gave me. Now I don't know about you but I do not take their blood on this dirt or any other, for those rights as something I should just give up w/o a fight. You sound like you would, I won't, nor will those I run with, which are either past/present mil, local, state, or Fed LE, trust us we are not going with the program. Like all the others around this nation, when the first one gets called on, the rest know the drill. Their are many in CT. who have chosen their destiny, and like me are in fact willing to die for what they believe in. If and when it starts there, like 200+ years ago, the sheep will keep being sheep, but around 3% like last time will not. Having a badge does not bypass the COTUS, dicking over folks over a traffic ticket is one thing, fucking with ones rights his kinfolks died defending or gaining is another. If you think the LAPD cluster fuck over one guy was interesting, the flip side of that coin will be required reading at a later date.
Do you think they will go house to house in Connecticut?
There are sheep who dress in wolf clothing. And there are sheep who volunteer to be eaten by the first wolf to appear. Neither survive first contact.
We accede by lottery, not by merit, to the rights that out forefathers "gave" us. We can squander them as sheep. Or we can squander them equally efficiently with pretensions of being a wolf.
That you claim to be fighting for your rights by advocating violent resistance is a valid argument, but not a good one. Any success will actually concede a greater failure, because it will give away the game to justification of a baser value than the one you are claiming to uphold...In which case your victory will be nothing more than a surrender performed on the enemy's ground.
The wolf/sheep analogy is so often misunderstood.
There are sheep who dress in wolf clothing. And there are sheep who volunteer to be eaten by the first wolf to appear. Neither survive first contact.
We accede by lottery, not by merit, to the rights that out forefathers "gave" us. We can squander them as sheep. Or we can squander them equally efficiently with pretensions of being a wolf.
That you claim to be fighting for your rights by advocating violent resistance is a valid argument, but not a good one. Any success will actually concede a greater failure, because it will give away the game to justification of a baser value than the one you are claiming to uphold...In which case your victory will be nothing more than a surrender performed on the enemy's ground.
Last edited:
This is the point of the Solzhenitzen quote. Each day of life in Siberia for him was a day living an extended drawn out, anquished, death.
How many people upon being stuffed into the trains to Auschwitz finally realized the real sitiuation but at the time they shed their denial of truth they were encircled by real force that they had delivered themselves to voluntarily.
The optimistic outlook is that Solzhenitzen survived Siberia and people escaped the killing apparatus of the Nazis. The world rejected totalitarianism when exposed to it.
The pendulum will swing. It may already be doing so. Note how the propaganda networks, MSNBC, have stopped allowing comment on the state of affairs because it was turning all negative (positive in the light of
Liberty). Lets hope it doesnt take an answer to the OPs question before common sense returns.
Last edited:
In every operation there is unknowns. The best planners think the drill threw, but every once in a while a hitch is thrown into the giddy up. Thinking there are not folks who won't die for their beliefs or past oaths is fool hardy at best. No one gets out alive, and the only thing/s a person will be remembered by/for are what they stood for while alive. There is not one person walking this rock that can't be got, regardless of who they are, or who is guarding them, that sir is plain fact. However if that person is removed those who started the chain of events may have lite a fuse that is unstoppable,... Much like the very early days of this nation.
The policy that is in play right now is to discredit, those who will/would stand up and that game has been in play for over 10 years. Nice to have those inside that have the same values as us,.... trouble making boat rockers. Then again not going with the program is a problem for those who think voiding the COTUS is OK as long as they have a badge, or use their desk as a Chasity belt.
The policy that is in play right now is to discredit, those who will/would stand up and that game has been in play for over 10 years. Nice to have those inside that have the same values as us,.... trouble making boat rockers. Then again not going with the program is a problem for those who think voiding the COTUS is OK as long as they have a badge, or use their desk as a Chasity belt.
It's nothing at all like the early days of our nation: We now have very different problems created by a more mature democracy.
There is nothing noble, or masculine, in rushing to advocate a primitive response to a superficial understanding of the problem.
They don't have to come after you. Once "they" figure you have broken the law, seize you bank accounts, turn off your power, seize your vehicles, turn off your water. Won't take but one or two in a neighborhood when the women and children are standing on the sidewalk crying, house surrounded by squad cars. The rest will comply.
My discussions with some very liberal east coast types solution to the isue is a temporary suspension of the search and seizure laws to facilitate the safety of all.
The discussion from a crazy point of view has since led to OK - if I turn them in I beleive at the very least, I get a fair market value in a tax break of some kind. You don't just get to take something which is mine and not pay me - which is the current way it is. The lib east coast reality I have heard is, shotguns OK, 22's OK - no high caps, one hunting with very rifle limited rounds, NO handguns at all.
This isn't just about firearms fellas, it is hotrods, pocket knives, all kinds of hobbies. Whatever is deemed bad for the public good.
If the government makes some law for some real property to be taken or otherwise seized or appropriated, then who ever it is taken from, deserves full value recompensation or a tax break. This one point stuns them because they have no idea how much it costs and money talk, scares them. They want your money too - for the children of course....
My discussions with some very liberal east coast types solution to the isue is a temporary suspension of the search and seizure laws to facilitate the safety of all.
The discussion from a crazy point of view has since led to OK - if I turn them in I beleive at the very least, I get a fair market value in a tax break of some kind. You don't just get to take something which is mine and not pay me - which is the current way it is. The lib east coast reality I have heard is, shotguns OK, 22's OK - no high caps, one hunting with very rifle limited rounds, NO handguns at all.
This isn't just about firearms fellas, it is hotrods, pocket knives, all kinds of hobbies. Whatever is deemed bad for the public good.
If the government makes some law for some real property to be taken or otherwise seized or appropriated, then who ever it is taken from, deserves full value recompensation or a tax break. This one point stuns them because they have no idea how much it costs and money talk, scares them. They want your money too - for the children of course....
Last edited:
Might be the view in your circle, not that way in others I can assure you. A man who won't fight or die for his beliefs, has none. Freedom is not, nor never has been free, someone has had to pay for it all along. To roll over and quit means you could care less about how others sacrificed their time, body parts or lives, so we could have what little we have left. When your back is against the wall like this nation is now, you have but two options,...
I was going to type a reply to this but what Gunfighter said sums it up nicely.
I firmly believe that it will be the lack of discipline of the jack boots that will be the cause that sets greater events into motion. The response by any law abiding gun owner will be purely reactionary and of little consequence to what actually "lights the fuse." The emotion will be that of sympathy for the gun owner and hatred of those that forced him to react to defend himself. It is in our nature to sympathize with the disadvantaged. It is much easier to empathize with the victim when the victim is perceived to be innocent. Before such events ever happen we already feel the emotion that would be tied to a situation where a bunch of LEO "thugs" arrive to an individuals home to take property that is owned by a guarantee granted to the owner by our highest rule of law in our country. Add to the fact that many of us swore to protect and uphold that rule of law, you have the perfect ingredients to cause an overwhelming reaction.
The opposite of apathy is emotion. The cure for apathy is emotion. No sane individual with any morals or integrity will be able to ignore that emotion or not react to it.
Last edited:
Wolverines!!
Do you think they will go house to house in Connecticut?
I am also advocating that, as a bridge between Sun Tzu and the modern theorists of war, knowing when to act might in most cases be more important than the act itself. After all, Machiavelli's "virtu" and "fortuna" are antagonistic brothers.
Jacques Ranciere has analyzed the hatred of democracy from Plato's Republic, Book VIII, to modern day. He's worth a read: He paints a vivid picture of sham promises within the rhetoric of freedom and individual rights.
Ranciere suggests that we consider what Hannah Arendt identified as the founding moment of all social movements: an act which at the same time begins and justifies itself. This combination of anticipation and act is the essence of all politics. The practical question becomes whether violence is necessary to create authority at the moment of founding (as Jacques Derrida has claimed).
Although I am convinced of the effectiveness of violence for the purpose of winning a war, I am not sure that violent resistance is, anymore, required in defense of principle within a mature democracy.
In sum: The 1970s called. You weren't home, so it left a message: Baader-Meinhof was then; this is now.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there is nothing worth dying for, but I am raising the question of whether there is a false effectiveness to offering one's life.
I am also advocating that, as a bridge between Sun Tzu and the modern theorists of war, knowing when to act might in most cases be more important than the act itself. After all, Machiavelli's "virtu" and "fortuna" are antagonistic brothers.
Jacques Ranciere has analyzed the hatred of democracy from Plato's Republic, Book VIII, to modern day. He's worth a read: He paints a vivid picture of sham promises within the rhetoric of freedom and individual rights.
Ranciere suggests that we consider what Hannah Arendt identified as the founding moment of all social movements: an act which at the same time begins and justifies itself. This combination of anticipation and act is the essence of all politics. The practical question becomes whether violence is necessary to create authority at the moment of founding (as Jacques Derrida has claimed).
Although I am convinced of the effectiveness of violence for the purpose of winning a war, I am not sure that violent resistance is, anymore, required in defense of principle within a mature democracy.
In sum: The 1970s called. You weren't home, so it left a message: Baader-Meinhof was then; this is now.
A buddy of mine who has military credentials equal to most anyone on here (Ive seen him put it on steel at1500 mtrs.) put it this way.
"There are according to the NRA 70 million or so gun owners in the US. Do the math. If for every one of us they take we take one or two, how long will it last?"
What strange quirk causes you to think of this as a "mature" democracy? By my observation it is anything but. They cant eve pass a budget.
I take your point, but rumor has it that Mussolini was frustrated at Italy's inability to make the trains run on time.
That's a simple one. too much red wine drunk from pewter cups.....LOL
And what floor of the nursing home would that be?
Similar threads
