Question of the Day: True Story?

TTAG reader kevhead recently made the following comment:

“Obama will seek to turn the tables on those acusing him of breaking his oath by saying he is upholding his oath to protect the Constitution from enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. A new, emotionally based term will emerge in the near future encompassing most of the people that would post here. This site itself could be viewed as a militant group of gun owners who meet regularly on the internet and often badmouth LEOs and troops. All the talk about what we would do if they come for our guns, and what it would take to start shooting can easily be turned against us along with the photos of our big gun collections and the many thousands of rounds of ammo we use for training. With all the hits this blog gets from across the country what if RF took an active anti govt stance?

“What if he advocated armed insurrection under certain circumstances instead of just threatening to move to TX? Is this site a loosely organized, internet militia? Don’t think for a second that there are not people working behind closed doors right now seeking ways to use the media to popularize a new definition of domestic terrorists that encompasses all of us. It’s all about control. They already control the first amendment rights. Like Ralph has pointed out the 1A is a fiction of the past. Now they will use it to make the 2A an element of our barbaric past.”

Possible? Probable? I hope I’m wrong, but I think crunch time is coming. It could play out this way . . .

New Yorkers will not, in the main, register their ARs. Someone will rat out someone who owns an illegal AR (30-round mags an all) and some police chief will think it’s his job to go in and get the damn thing and some homeowner will defend his AR with his AR and a SWAT cop or two will get shot and the media will go CRAZY.

At that point, or even before, kevhead’s scenario kicks in. The MSM paints all “assault rifle” owners as madmen/proto-terrorists. The press spreads that meme to include all gun owners, as they did when the Tea Party was ascendant. Call it the James Yeagerization of America.

The ATF gets involved. Someone else gets a visit and does not quietly into that long night go. Or they do, and they become a lightning rod for increased opposition.

All hell breaks loose. At that point, all bets are off. God help us, I hope it never comes anywhere near that. But if it does, yup, I get the proverbial knock in the middle of the night and TTAG goes dark.

Question: are kevhead and I paranoid loons?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

123 Responses to Question of the Day: True Story?

  1. avatarGunNut says:

    I hope so, Mr. Farago.

    I hope so.

    • avatarHauptgefreiter says:

      I have a question? Where are all the TTAG news reports of shootings like in NM, TX an KY? I believe reports like that would make for a more balanced site and would put things like the ethics and morality of guns in a more balanced perspective.

      • avatarGunNut says:

        I’m not understanding why your question is a reply to my comment…

      • avatarBobby says:

        Why do you ask this question on multiple posts?

      • avatarDrDave says:

        A gun has no ethics or morality. Those are qualities possessed only by sentient beings. Your’s is a problem of projection.

      • avatarBud says:

        Good idea!
        Here in Illinois, we can add all the shootings that happen every single day and often, hourly! We kill ‘em young and old, innocent, and banger, anyone!
        We are a non discriminating gun free society by law!

  2. avatarDrVino says:

    I think, based on the tone of the coverage of McVeigh (and those he associated/affiliated with) after the Oklahoma City bombing, the answer is YES.

    Think of how they already characterize militias or people with Molon Labe stickers/tatoos/flags/patches/etc…

  3. avatarDon says:

    No. This story can be conceived of by the pro-gun people and the anti-people alike. The media has already framed gun owners in this way and been trying to increase acceptance of that stereotype for decades. They are doing it because it is the “last best hope” of getting what they want.

    -D

  4. avatarSamir Syed says:

    I hope you still like cars, Robert.

  5. avatarChris says:

    Considering his oath is to the Constiution no one who posts here could be considered an enemy of what that document represents. More projecting from the Divider in Chief.

  6. avatarWilliam says:

    I am afraid he’s right, and what it means is a coordinated attack on the First Amendment, contemporaneously with the one on the second. They’ll get to the other eight in due course.

    • avatarFyrewerx says:

      And the following actions would violate 4A. Kinda snowballs doesn’t it?

      • avatarMikeP says:

        Already there; NDAA. Under NDAA, the POTUS can pretty much designate anyone or any group as a terrorist organization and those folks have no legal protections. This also applies to those “found” giving “aid and comfort” or financial support to those designated groups (such as membership dues or donations *cough* *cough*) “Black-bagging” arrests – where you “dist-appear” and are never heard from again. No formal charges. No trial. Indefinite detention. It designated the United States a “battlefield” and allows the imposition of the laws of war on citizens. Then there’s this:

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/17/west-point-center-cites-dangers-far-right-us/

        Almost like these have been chess moves, and not random coincidences.

        • avatarJB says:

          The entire globe is the “battlefield”. And they don’t have to bother “disappearing” you, they can simply destroy you with a Predator drone. There’s a reason they killed Al-Awlaki the way they did. It had nothing to do with terrorism and had everything to do with Al-Awlaki’s US citizenship.

  7. avatarRoss says:

    Yep, I could see it going this way real fast and real soon.

  8. avatarFrank says:

    Yes, right, gun owners and gun organizations routinely threaten to kill the constitution… “If the constitution comes to take my AR I’ll shoot it right in the third amendment.” I hear that all the time.

  9. avatarHuman Being says:

    You might want to consider some sort of quick “dump” command that would delete all the email addresses and contact information TTAG has gathered.

    • avatarJeff the Griz says:

      too late Im sure this site has been monitored for a long time, your IP address is already sitting in a file somewhere in DC ;)

      • avatarHuman Being says:

        The IP address is fine. They won’t find an actionable mailing address for me off of that. Email addresses could be pieced together to figure one out though.

        • avatarDrVino says:

          Unless you have a static IP…..

        • avatarLeo338 says:

          In order to get anywhere on the Internet you have to go through your ISP’s DNS server. So you can easily be tracked via your IP address whether its static or dynamic. You can get a little anonymity on the web by using a proxy server. I think you may also be able to modify the lmhost file to resolve names and addresses for you, this would have to be used in tandem with IP spoofing though.

        • avatarHuman Being says:

          Or just the circumstance that my name isn’t attached to the physical addy this IP address corresponds to, and I won’t be located here much longer.

  10. avatarJeff the Griz says:

    I guess we need to be more proactive in the labeling department then, maybe its time for us to coin a more likeable term for us, 2nd amendment supporter has become “gun nut” in the mind of others, and main stream media is demonizing the nra, maybe we should call ourselves constitutional defenders to shed some of our stereotyping. Also we need to coin a more appropriate term to make gun grabber sound awful to those on the fence, terrorist against the founding fathers, lol a bit long but this is a democratic republic and the squeaky wheel does get the grease…

  11. avatarHenry Bowman says:

    It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

    • avatarAJ says:

      Maybe that wireless connection in your neighborhood labeled “Surveillance Van” isn’t just your neighbor being funny…

      • avatarjoe says:

        That is awesome! I’m changing my network name to that tonight :)

        • avatarJustAJ says:

          HAHA! I read something like that a while back – a neighbor was hijacking a guy’s wireless so he renamed it “FBI Surveillance Van” which sparked a whole list of good ones, using various law enforcement prefixes (CIA Safe House, DEA Sting House, etc.)

  12. avatarJim R says:

    I hope to God it’s just paranoia. But it is possible.

  13. avatarMike DC says:

    As far as registration goes it’s estimated on 1-2% of “assault rifles” in NY and 10% in CA are register under current laws and nothing has happen yet. I can’t see the registration rates going up when the laws get even more restrictive.

  14. avatarChip says:

    “…Question: are kevhead and I paranoid loons?”

    Yes.

    But that doesn’t change the probable history about to unfold.

    Being paranoid doesn’t mean you are wrong. It just means you are aware of more than one possible outcome in any proposed solution.

  15. avatarLeo338 says:

    A lot of liberals on Facebook have been calling us terrorist for a few months now. Everything they do and think they are now portraying onto us. They say we are the ones bringing the country down, Everything we believe in is just a big lie, we are merely sheep that are controlled by extremist (TTAG, Mr Colion Noir etc..), and we are more of a threat to America than Al Qaeda is.

    This is all their words not mine. So yes, I think Robert is right and this is the direction Obama and the MSM will not pursue. If it weren’t for the MSM I don’t think things would be nearly as bad as they are now. IMO the MSM should be enemy number 1.

  16. avatarjwm says:

    What if RF took an active anti government stance? If this site is a result of Rf not being anti government I’d hate to see what’s going to happen if he does go the full monty.

    And the g and media we have now are going to demonize us no matter how well we behave. If we’re going to get the spanking anyway. we might as well jam both hands in the cookie jar.

  17. avatarBlake says:

    Robert, did you ever imagine you would have to ask such a question? Did you ever think you’d have a chance to witness what could very well be a pivotal moment in the history of the US?

    That such a question can even be asked speaks volumes about the times in which we live.

    Right now, Obama and the gun control crowd are trying to pin the Yellow Star of “crazy knuckle dragging neanderthal” on gun owners. Gun owners beware.

    • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

      “That such a question can even be asked speaks volumes about the times in which we live.”

      Hey! Off my wavelength, brother!

  18. avatarBadger 8-3 says:

    Paranoid loons? Nope. Not in the slightest. Rather, I think you, and a good many others around here, are simply voicing a possibility. A very scary, very tragic possibility…

    Fact is, they’re teaching West Point cadets that right-wing “extremists” who believe in smaller government and less intrusion in their lives are “the new breed of domestic terrorists.” This fight is coming, whether we want it to or not. The fact that the idea is being discussed is a huge red flag to me. Something is in the works…

    DISCLAIMER: I neither want, nor advocate armed rebellion.

    There. I’ve covered myself. In the meantime…MOLON LABE.

    v/r
    Badger 8-3

  19. avatar#2 says:

    I agree with Henry, the sad reality we live in is that the situation is deteriorating. States are actively deciding where their stance is on liberty, and there are no geographic lines to tell you which side is which. People like Yeager have their line in the sand, and I truly believe that people like him in states that support civilian disarmament will kick this thing off.

  20. avatarhoppes#9 says:

    I’m buying all the Alcoa stock I can. Tin foil hat season.

  21. avatarensitu says:

    The entire purpose of this Anti-Constutional Lunacy is to create a Crisis for which Zeke has the Solution.
    It also makes a great smoke screen for the 1000′s of MEs flooding into America.
    did you hear how the Saudis forced all their dath row inmates to fight Jihad in Syria? Do you think that may have been a Beta Test?

  22. avatarMark says:

    The scenario that Robert laid out is pretty close to what I’ve been thinking could happen. Obama, despite his claiming to want us to all “get along”, doesn’t do much to bring us together. His words usually seem to be aimed at driving a wedge between his butt-kissers and everybody else. I don’t see a very good end to the gun grab other than Congress and the Senate and the Supreme Court growing some collective balls and telling Obama “You cannot take away American’s RIGHT to KEEP AND BEAR arms. Period”. Not much chance of that I’m afraid.

  23. avatarDaniel says:

    No one ever said this would be easy.

    Buck up, ladies and gentlemen. Fate may just call on you at a moment not-of-your-choosing, and you will help to fulfill Thomas Jefferson’s prophecy. If so, be honored. If not, cower, and accept enslavement. God help us all- especially you- if you walk quietly into that night.

  24. avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

    Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you’ll live… at least a while.

    And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin’ to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take… OUR FREEDOM!

    • avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

      I know not what course others may take; but as for me, GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!

  25. avatartdiinva says:

    Reality Check.

    We have already seen how Red State Chief Executives and LEOs will react. They will resist any move by the Federal Government to encroach on gun rights. That means the National Guard will be called out to deal with an attempted Federal takeover.

    It is doubtful that red minded LEOs will cooperate with their Blue State governors. Some will do nothing, others will resist. It will be a place by place decision. The Blue State Governors will not call out their Guard units because they will be unreliable. They will use their state controlled LEOs to assist the Feds but many will not participate.

    The JCS knows that the military will fragment if used against the overall law abiding civilian population and will likely stay out of it. The Army will hide behind Posse Comitatis to avoid action. That is the best case. The worst case is that the military will step in to prevent civil war and will remove the President and Vice President. Can you say El Commandante Petreaus?

    If the President moves against law abiding gun owners in blue areas using Federal LEOs he will probably get away with it. However, once he moves to less friendly areas you will probably see a lot dead Feds at the hands of National Guard and local LEOs.

    In other words, it’s not happening.

    • avatarmatt says:

      The Army will hide behind Posse Comitatis to avoid action.

      It was repealed.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act#Recent_legislative_events

      The JCS knows that the military will fragment if used against the overall law abiding civilian population and will likely stay out of it.

      No they wont. No other organization has deliberately killed more American citizens than the US military. They’ve been more than willing to go so far as launching air strikes with explosive and chemical ordinance such as during the Battle Of Blair Mountain in 1921.

      It is doubtful that red minded LEOs will cooperate with their Blue State governors. Some will do nothing, others will resist.

      They all ready grab guns from Americans on a daily basis. Where in 2A does it say that a felon, subject of a restraining order or domestic batterer can’t own a firearm?

  26. avatarJSIII says:

    Its called a civil war. Do some research about the real social causes of the civil war and you will see a lot of parallels.

  27. avatarRalph says:

    Would the media love things to go that way. Oh, hell yeah. Would POTUS and his minions want things to go that way? No. POTUS may think he’s the reincarnation of Lincoln, but I do not believe that he actually wants to relive Lincoln’s career and preside over the death of hundreds or thousands of Americans who just happen to disagree with his bullsh!t.

    • avatartdiinva says:

      I don’t see Obama wanting to go down as the next Salvadore Allende either.

    • avatarHuman Being says:

      Hasn’t he already killed several with drone strikes overseas? Along with hundreds of anonymous graphics-on-a-screen? In addition to just sitting back and doing nothing at Benghazi? I’m also not sold on his humility in-belief he can keep a situation from spiraling out of control.

      (Edit: which is not to say striking AQ targets is a bad thing; just that depending on his pacifism and sentimentality may not be reliable.)

      • avatarmatt says:

        Hasn’t he already killed several with drone strikes overseas?

        Abdulrahman al-Aulaqi and Anwar al-Aulaqi were two American citizens Obama had extrajudicially executed. I’m sure there have been more.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        Salvadore Allende was the Barak Obama of his day in Chile. He went too far and ended up removed from office by General Augusto Pinochet. Allende shot himself before the General arrived to remove him. There was alledged CIA invlovement but drones weren’t invented yet.

    • avatarRussell says:

      Obama DOES believe that he is liberating slaves. These are economic slaves that only social justice and equality can cure. There is no coincidence that Obama, his minions, Pelosi and the media are liking Obama to Lincoln.

  28. avatarSteve says:

    Take off the Tinfoil hats folks.

    Idle speculation on the internet is just that. We have a divided government for a reason. If the legislature makes unconstitutional laws, the SC can strike them down. If the Executive takes Unconstitutional actions, the Legislature and SC can reign him in.

    Chill.

    • avatarChuckN says:

      If?!

      This Prez has done multiple things that are
      borderline, if not outright, unconstitutional.
      The recent EOs come to mind. Some are so
      ambiguous that congress or a court is going
      to need to define them in order to rule on
      constitutionality. We’re not even sure whether
      the Prez has the authority to issue said EOs.
      And look at who is one of the main people to
      act as the 1st line of defense, the attorney
      general. The same man who was recently held
      in contempt by congress for lying. Which
      brings us to another problem.

      Congress itself is a disaster. If congress had
      any teeth, the Atty General would be behind
      bars for the contempt order as well as the DOJ
      personnel who refused to obey a lawful
      congressonal order and prosecute. If they
      had any integrity left, discussions for
      impeachment for Fast and Furious, and the
      Bengazi coverup would be nightly news.

      And finally, anyone who has worked in the
      American court system can tell you how
      badly misplaced your trust really is.

    • avatarRalph says:

      @Steve, all I can say is Dred Scott. Divided government did not prevent that inhuman law from being validated by SCOTUS. If you think it can’t happen again, then I have to ask you to please stop Bogarting that blunt you’re puffing.

    • avatarmiforest says:

      yeah. I am sure that steely eyed boehner an John “iron wall” Roberts will make short work of any actions that are against the pale.
      with men like that protecting us who would dare even think…..

      It’s always ” it could never happen here” untill it does.

      It’s probably low probability, but america is not so special as to be exempt from things like this.

  29. avatarjames h says:

    I wonder how many people saying they will shoot gun grabbers, ect… have actually been involved in a war? I fought in Iraq, and trust me, you wouldn’t want your family around that sort of chaos, murder, rape, and robbery.
    Besides gun confiscation has already happened in New Orleans, and other places. It went quietly, without any resistance. Face it, active resistance will be very rare. The Iraqi’s where better armed then we will ever be. Some fought, and where crushed. They lost thousands… maybe 50k, the real figure will never be known.
    I guess the resistance beat us. We are gone from Iraq, and few if any American Corporations are receiving any more benefit from the county. Will gun owners be willing to lose 50k in a civil war over the 2nd amendment. I doubt it. Am I a coward? Possibly. I am just being honest. No one in there right mind would think a tiny insurgency could beat the most powerful military on earth.
    Also, when I was in the Army, I would have carried out almost any order. I don’t think troops would have a problem killing their countrymen. The only hope for victory would be if a large portion of the Army defected. Thats not going to happen either.

    • avatarDaniel says:

      “Besides gun confiscation has already happened in New Orleans, and other places. It went quietly, without any resistance.”

      There wasn’t a highly divisive political and imperiled constitutional backdrop to that scenario. Plus, no one knew it was happening.

      America, on the other hand, is on high alert, condition red. Once you start stepping on people’s throats in a high-profile manner, their neighbors are going to come out holding pitchforks.

      As for all your other predictions: We will see. It is very easy to carry out any order against someone from another country. When that order results in your homeland burning… Mass rebellion and war has been sparked by far less.

    • avatarjwm says:

      You would have followed orders to engage Americans in your own hometown? How about your parents neighberhood? If so, you’re a lot different than the men I served with. I wonder if you’re a lot different than the men you served with?

      • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

        Hell of a lot different then the men I served with as well.

        For the record, James, Iraq was nasty. I was there, and wouldn’t wish those circumstances upon anyone. Yet, I would gladly endure warfare ten times as bad to ensure that American’s rights are not signed away with a stroke of the pen.

        However, as far as armed rebellion is concerned, the USSR was much better at crushing it that the USA has ever been, primarily because the USSR is much more inclined to use brutal tactics than we are. And some rag-tag Afghanis and Chechens have been able to kick the Russkies collective asses. Those same Afghanis and now the Iraqis have been able to hold off the US as well, no matter which president declares “victory”.

        Furthermore, I know quite a few blooded veterans, well trained in counter-insurgency, who took their oaths seriously. ALL threats. Foreign and DOMESTIC. And their IFF isn’t broken…

        • avatarLeo338 says:

          @Kevheads postI think this needs to be given more attention. If this is true which I believe it is, then we are pretty much screwed. Based on Obama’s conditions all of us here on TTAG would be considered “anti-federalists” by his administration. That would allow them to jail or shoot us and because of the label the typical American citizen will not care. They will think we were some extremist.

    • avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

      The fact that you specifically say that you would have followed any order you were given says everything about your character and integrity…or lack there of.

      FLAME DELETED

      –1st battalion 75th Ranger Regiment

    • avatarRalph says:

      Nobody here is volunteering for a war, james h. But nobody here is waiving their right to self defense either.

    • avatartdiinva says:

      This exchange highlights why the military will not get involved. You cannot go war against the American people if a significant part of the military won’t obey orders.

      [Answer to Matt] That is why I said that the JCS will either sit it out or remove the President. The military leadership won’t do it out fidelity to the checks and balances in the Constitution. They will not actively support such a move because they still see themselves as a national Army not a party Army. We don’t have Zampolits yet. They will see a possible mutiny by a substantial number of troops as compromising their primary mission to defend the nation and not a particular President. If they saw it any other way then you get the Pinochet solution which none of us want either. [Well, maybe Matt's ok with that.]

      This thread has caused TTAG to lose a lot of credibility with me. Wasting resources on tinfoil hat topics diverts us from focusing on defending our Second Amendment rights in the correct manner and compromises us with general public who we are trying to keep on our side.

      • avatarmatt says:

        What makes you think they will refuse orders? Can you name a single time in the past where they have refused orders to fire upon American civilians, or to seize their guns?

        • avatartdiinva says:

          Matt:

          I am going to treat you like adult and give you a reasoned answer. It’s easy to follow orders in a single instance. It’s a lot harder when there is a general uprising.

          Here is another shot of reality for you. I bet you would be one of the guys to follow orders so don’t project what you would do onto others.

  30. avatarmiforest says:

    understanding the worst case scenario is possible , even though not likely, does not make one paranoid.

    then math of this doesn’t work for them. Even if everything goes well, to set up a team, , get them togather, perform the action, fill out the reports, feed the agents and dogs, and get ready to go to the next location would take half a day. they don’t have anywhere near the manpower to do it. The governors aren’t going to call up the national guard to help. my city of 100K probably has 10000 households with arms. Not happening.

    However: I do expect a complete demogogic attack from the pols and especialy obama demonizng us in the most vile and reprehensable way.

    I expect you to be able to continue informing us for a while.

  31. avatarMy name is Bob says:

    Anyone who seeks to deprive us of our God given right to keep and bear arms will quickly realize that there enough of us out there to make the task of confiscation the spark that ignites the powder keg. There may be some out there that say “Molon labe” strictly as “lip service,” but many will “live it” until their heart ceases beating.

  32. avatarGunNut says:

    So here’s a question for all of those old enough to remember the Clinton ban:

    As a college student who only got into guns a few years ago, I don’t have any knowledge of the run-up to the Clinton AWB. Were there serious discussions like this being had? Or is this something new altogether?

    • avatarmiforest says:

      nothing like this. only similarity was the price of hi cap mag went up, and some of the banned guns went up. no ammo shortages, no talk of confiscation , none of that.

    • avatarHuman Being says:

      Two words: no internet.

      Nor was there a dissenting voice in cable news.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Gun nut, it was nothing like this. The Clinton ban dealt with cosmetics more than anything else. POTUS has total civilian disarmament on his mind.

      • avatarGunNut says:

        Thanks for the reply.

        I understand what you’re saying about the legislative nuts and bolts of all this, along with how things have changed this time (and all the motives behind it).

        What I was mainly wondering about was whether there were things like Utah police pledging to die defending the Second Amendment, tons of “average Joes” drawing a hard line in the sand, and so on. Basically, gun owners’ attitudes then versus now. Have we got a stiffer spine this time around?

  33. avatarslow says:

    Perhaps you should consider backing up or moving your servers offshore. Might prevent or at least slow down a denial of service attack. Not tin foil related just good business these days. Really won’t do much to keep uncle at bay.

  34. avatarJohn says:

    Point of clarification:

    The President’s Oath of Office does not include the clause “to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. The Vice President, Congress, and military officers all currently use that wording, but the Presidential Oath of Office is taken directly from the Constitution, and does not use the same wording.

    • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

      Correct.

      However, the Presidential Oath of Office includes the word “preserve”. Not as in a jam-like substance, but as in “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.”

      Just sayin’

    • avatarMark says:

      But is DOES say “…preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The obamanation is in violation.

    • avatarkevhead says:

      My bad… And I hate stupidly miss-quoting something so easily verifiable. Maybe the Founders deliberately omitted that phraseology from His oath. It makes sense to me in this context. How and when was it added to the others?

  35. avatarAJ says:

    No matter how much basis in fact/evidence there is to support a possibility, there will always be people who insist that the possibility does not exist, and there’s nothing to be afraid of. I’m of hte opinion that you plan for the worst case scenario (SHTF), and work towards the goal of best case scenario. Denying that something is possible, even something that is highly unlikely, leaves you wholly unprepared when or if that something happens.

    Do I think gun grabbers will be pounding on my door in the middle of the night? No, or not yet anyway. That doesn’t mean I’m going to turn a blind eye and pretend nothing will happen. When/If the four horsemen come riding over the horizon, it’ll be too late to prepare.

    • avatarDaniel says:

      I’m sure there were plenty of people in Germany in the 1930s who thought their government would NEVER, -EVER- be capable of genocide.

      What’s worse, when it started to happen, they all looked the other way.

      For those of you who acknowledge that the holocaust happened- and of you, those who say we must learn from history- if you say that such things as what has been discussed in here could never happen, you are a disgrace to your fellow man. These things can happen, and they have happened- in MUCH more civil societies than what we find ourselves in today.

      Don’t just SAY “learn from history”- LEARN FROM IT.

      • avatarAJ says:

        I can’t tell if we’re on the same side, although I’m leaning towards yes. While I don’t think that the worst case is imminent just yet, there are plenty of signs indicating things can get very real very fast without some serious intervention by actual common sense, not the “common sense” that the grabbers preach.

  36. avatarmatt says:

    It sounds like kevhead is a butthurt cop/service member who is trying to silence dissent.

  37. avatarRizzy says:

    I would bet that bank accounts being frozen and wages being garnished would be the more likely step. Much easier to drain an account and safer too. If they know which doors to knock on, then they know which bank accounts to seize.

  38. avatarRydak says:

    Grass roots is always the answer, with a bit of help from social media, and a constant check keeping of the actual radicals, which we all know do exist, will make them loose and us win. Hows that debate about armed officers in schools going for ya main stream media? How about your attack on the NRA? hahaha

  39. avatarBud says:

    Great discussion and a lot to think about and consider.
    I am retired as both a soldier and as a LEO. I have lived my Oath to both services my whole life as I was raised to do. I believe my son was raised in the same way and feels the same as i do.
    Having said that, I think I owe all of the generations after me an abject apology for not having done enough to prevent where we now find ourselves.
    It’s almost like being frozen in slow motion, standing in a room filled with gas fumes and watching the idiot over in the corner pulling out a bic to light his cigarette and knowing that he is just out of reach and you won’t be able to stop it.

  40. avatarSGC says:

    I “hope” this is not our future, but I am afraid…there is a great divide among us as a nation, and it’s going to be pushed to a breaking point within the next four years.

  41. avatarAharon says:

    Another very long time-consuming comment spun off by spam checker into limbo. I’m going to start writing short comments.

    • avatarmiforest says:

      write it in word then copy and paste it. it it gets deleted you can break it up without retyping.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      Right there with you. It wouldn’t be so bad if the TTAG crew were minding the flagged-for-moderation queue and liberating trapped comments throughout the day.

  42. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    I think that if the SWAT scenario were to happen once to a lone gunman the liberal media would run with it. But it probably won’t happen just once. What’s more, it may not be just LEOs and perps that get hurt. What happens when a LEO’s bullets kill a 14 year old boy and his mother? Remember in the 90s the government’s reputation and in particular the federal law enforcement agencies suffered irreparable damage from the Ruby Ridge and Branch Davidian incidences. They pushed thousands into militia movements and help popularize the very weapons their trying to ban now. The liberal media couldn’t shield the government from a general feeling that it had grown too big for it’s britches and helped wipe out the Democratic House in ’94. Next thing you know ol’ Slick Willie was announcing the “end of the era of big government”.

    The Dems are playing with fire. They should listen to Willie.

  43. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Personally I think it will all work out relativly fine, although I didn’t think that o was the ravenous grabber he turned out to be, so it will be interesting, Randy

  44. avatarJoseph says:

    The president is not a stupid person.

    The GAO said last week that the current spending by the government is “unsustainable.” He knows that but will probably not stop spending. Sooner or later the dollar will collapse, along with the economy. When that happens the SHTF. So, now is a good time to try to get as many civilian guns as possible so that martial law goes a bit smoother. They also have the upcoming UN treaty card in their hand. I don’t think all these things are mere coincidence.

    Pray it doesn’t happen but prepare to defend yourself. BTW../I bet TTAG is on the FBI favorite reading list.

  45. avatarBlinkyPete says:

    I think people that really hate Obama spend to much time attributing magical, boundless powers to him and too little time realizing what an idiot he really is.

  46. avatarpeter says:

    With so much chaos, someone will do something stupid. And when they do, things will turn nasty. And then Sutler will be forced to do the only thing he knows how to do. At which point, all V needs to do is keep his word. And then…

    V for Vendetta seems to be coming true. Britain is a police state. The extremists on both sides are predicting either a civil war or a WROL situation in America.

    I hope that I am wrong.

    • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

      You know, my hope is that in 20 or 30 years, my LT and I can sit down on his porch, in a rocking chair, cigars and scotch in hand and joke about what idiots we were back in the day, thinking that there was a possibility of needing to take up arms to defend our freedom.

  47. avatarMikeinid says:

    Of course we all take a risk posting here, Mr. Farago and company many times over. I appreciate their work, and willingness to risk who knows what.
    Bottom line, I think the current politicians will do anything they can get away with. It is up to us to make sure that is very little. I reupped NRA, and donated to GOA. These are paltry actions, but I hope they mean something.

  48. avatarBlehtastic says:

    Meh, I always assume anyone agreeing with me about guns is a narc.

  49. avatarDrVino says:

    I can’t believe this did not occur to me earlier, but I’m an AK variant collector.

    Will AR/MSR/Tacticool fans sell ME out?…..

    • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

      I won’t. Then again, I provide a loving home to both Russian orphans, and those who are children of a Stoner.

    • avatarWLCE says:

      nope because i would be in the same boat as you. ;)

      it gets cold and icy up here in montana. my kalashnikov’s children have a hayday in this environment.

  50. avatarMercutio says:

    Six years ago, I would have said “Yes, Sir, you are nuts” … today? Deponent declines to answer.

  51. avatarJJ Kavanaugh says:

    If you and kevhead are paranoid or loons, you have a third for bridge. Certain sure we’ll have plenty of company.

  52. avatarpat says:

    While still unlikely, Barry is really starting to unfurl his batlike libtard demon wings and one should be watchful of everything going on. The question is, how will NY react to these draconian laws, and, will it spread?

    • avatarDrVino says:

      I am not prone to conspiratorial thinking, but this does lend credence to BO having a tendency to think a certain way:

      “Obama speech: Anti-government era is over”
      http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/22/opinion/jones-obama-speech/index.html?hpt=hp_c2
      While this is likely more a reference to Reagan-era anti-governmentalism, I can understand how it resonates with some when the NRA and other pro-gun groups are labeled as “anti-government”.

      On the flip side, I do have to point out that it was fine to be anti-government in the 60s but now, that those people ARE the government, it is frowned upon….
      That duality and hypocrisy trouble me.

      • avatarpat says:

        The 60′s anti-gov message was ‘Bring It All Down’….. todays is ‘DONT Bring It All Down’. This is a simplification, though I think, a powerful one.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.