Social media has been a cesspool of anti-gun rhetoric lately, and it’s mostly coming from those of the left. But, if you’re like me, and advocate for complete gun rights freedom, you’re open to threats from those who disagree with you. Even from some military service members who feel the government should heavily arm them while we fight for our right to keep our AR-15s.
For the most part, I can let social media posts go without unleashing my opinion. But earlier this morning, as a few of my friends and I joked about not having the cash to buy an apache helicopter, I was threatened by a military service member. He called me a “crazy anarchist” and said he hopes he gets the order to take guns away so that he can personally take mine.
No, that is not an exaggeration and I will enclose photos to prove it.
Differences of opinion are now met with threats of violence against peaceful gun owning people. This is, unfortunately, par for the course for gun owners these days. Especially those of us who don’t think the government needs more power to regulate what we can and cannot own.
The conversation quickly escalated after his reply and my comment. Basically, the government should decide what private citizens are allowed to own, keeping our power in check and in the hands of the government where he thinks it rightly belongs.
After he blamed gun rights for the mess in Afghanistan, I let him know that I think civilians should be able to have whatever we can afford to keep us level with the government. He didn’t like that much.
I’ve never once advocated that statists or socialists be disarmed even though I wholeheartedly disagree with their political ideology. I will never advocate for the disarmament of other humans because of a difference of opinion. So much for that freedom of speech he insists he fought for me to have. Apparently, only some humans are worthy of gun ownership.
The irony of the situation was the fact that he called me crazy and a danger to society, yet he threatens to come for my guns, even though I’ve never acted in a violent or threatening manner.
Gun owners are going to be put the ringer for quite some time. At least through the election, most likely. Many are no longer even trying to hide the fact that they want to disarm us. But remember, no one is coming for your guns. If you like them, you can keep them.
So what about his military oath to uphold and defend the Constitution? Doesn’t he also realize his very threat of hoping to get the order to take Sara’s weapons gives proof that citizens should indeed be armed to protect themselves from tyranny?
Just because he represents himself as military doesn’t mean that he really is. A lot of people play pretend games online.
This is very true Ralph but I bet he really is military and believes that his service and training make him a special entity better capable of operating and managing ‘ weapons of war ‘ . This is also a position that a lot of police officers take when it comes to the right of a free citizenry to bear arms .
I love most police officers and will honor anyone who sacrifices there safety for someone else’s safety but I won’t excuse pompas asses that set themselves up over the law no matter who they might be and in todays world I wouldn’t be surprised if we no longer required recruits to take an oath to our constitution , after all , the commander in chief doesn’t believe in it himself .
I would be willing to bet that I know more about construction of , deconstruction of , care and maintainence of and function of firearms than 75% of both law enforcement and military and would also wager a bet that I have trained more , drilled more and shot more than said folks and on a greater variety of also .
I have accumulated seven notebooks on the art of reloading over the last almost 30 years and have personally owned and functioned at least 100 different rifles , as many handguns and at least 40 different calibers . I’ve never been arrested with a conviction , I’ve been ticketed three times in 42 years for speeding , I’ve never committed an act of violence on anyone else , undeservedly and I’ve never raised a hand against a woman , yet these folks would deprive me the right to defend myself against them .
I think not .
I had a conversation with two Orange Co. Deputies who were not thrilled that citizens could keep and bear arms. The 2nd A be damned. There is a mindset among many, too many Americans, that guns only represent crime and violence. They seem to be completely oblivious to all of the good things the guns represent. Freedom is not protected and guaranteed by men from the debate club. It is protected and guaranteed by people armed with guns.
I live in a part of Texas that is very red, and armed to the teeth, but a few of our newest LEOs moved here from CA, and they have this man’s attitude. Unfortunately, I think there is more of this than we wish.
LEO≠automatic friend to people of the gun
Vet≠automatic friend to people of the gun
When someone asks you if you are a God, you say, “Yes!”
Oooh, Ghostbusters reference! Well played!
Yeah, I doubt the guy’s military. Keyboard command having a life-fantasy is more like it.
I ACTUALLY AMin the army, and I won’t take your guns.
I can almost guarantee, if that guy is military, he’s either Air Force of Intel. You have nothing to worry about. Lol
If he’s really military, I would put my money on Navy first, Air Force second. But ya never know.
All the navy bois I know emigrated to Australia or Canada.
Food for thought.
If that guy is Air Force, he’s probably a paper-pusher in an office. Aircraft maintenance and other blue-collar career fields are pretty darned conservative.
Hey, now, don’t paint all us Air Force paper pushers with the same brush. You have friends where you may not expect.
What is with the anti-USAF rhetoric? I served 21+ years, including Vietnam, and would never consider disarming American citizens after I took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Not part of it but ALL of it. Not just for certain people who believe as I do, but for ALL American citizens. Even anti-gun folks have the right to change their minds based on personal experiences. Like a woman I know whose ex was so abusive the court forbid him from contact with her or their daughter. Or another who was being stalked by a sexual predator who had already done time for sexual assault.
The 2nd Amendment is not my right, or your right. It is everyone’s right as citizens of this nation. (I have no problem restricting non-citizens or criminals – especially violent ones.)
Part of the anti-USAF stereotype is based in fact. I was a USAF weapons instructor, and I was surprised over and over again by the number of people I ran into that were vehemently anti-gun. Some were from career fields where you would expect it (like the multiple medical AFSCs/MOSs, they display the same problems with guns that civilian docs/nurses often do); others were a complete shock. Cops (Security) mostly, and other folks who came in without a guaranteed career path, or someone who had flunked out of their primary field schooling. They needed Security folks, and if you were a warm body with average intelligence, first they’d try you in the Security field before they dropped you into one of the really crap fields or booted you over the fence. Properly motivated (do well, or you’re outta here), many became Security or LE, even though they were anti-gun or afraid of firearms.
Then you had the fields that drew people because they had no overseas assignments, such as silo-based nuke missile maintenance, even though some of these folks had to be armed to perform certain duties.
I had people actually interrupt our weapons classes and ask the instructor why they were there. First I told them to contact their commander, who had scheduled them for training. If they persisted, I’d tell them they’d find the reason on the top line of their ID card. They’d read something else off the card, and I’d say “No, the VERY top line, right along the top border.”
It said “Armed Forces Identification Card”.
You maybe one of the good guys, but both my father in law and sister in law were both on the Air Force and both were vehemently anti – gun. I was able to make some progress with my father in law, my sister in law, not so much.
I’m both of those things and I absolutely won’t take your guns
This is exactly why I wrote the article posted earlier. I have encountered more than one member of the Armed Forces that has made similar statements. My article was addressed to hopefully remind those that swore an oath, that their loyalty should be to the People and the Constitution. Not to the whim of uninformed opinion or an unconstitutional elected official.
Not only do they need to remember that they did take the oath, but also at the time of discharge from service there is nothing signed, stated, sworn to, etc. that removes that sworn duty.
Yeah, but once a douche, always a douche.
Most of us dont need to be reminded of the oath we took, but thanks for your concern.
“So what about his military oath to uphold and defend the Constitution”
Abrogated immediately afterwards by the line about obeying “lawful orders”, the definition of “lawful’ being the sole domain of the government.
The internet, like alcohol, brings out the real person. And it can be ugly at times. Very dark and ugly.
But that’s why we have guns. To protect from the dark and ugly.
Exactly. A drunk mans words are a sober mans thoughts. And to the guy who says he looks forward to an “order” to take our firearms, I hope you have your affairs in order. This old Marine will only return my weapons with the barrels hot enough to brand cattle.
Yes, and anonymous ex prison guards from California (or is it Illinois today) can toss out the race card at will. Carry on, illegally.
First, hipster, pond avenue and whatever name your trolling under today. I’ve never been a prison guard. I did work in a prison but not as a guard. So at least try to get your slander right.
And, just as expected, your comments reveal that you favor gun control. How can someone with 2a rights be carrying “illegally”? Or do you agree with CA’s take on civil rights?
And you’re so ashamed of your past stands that you won’t admit what name you posted under when we had a clash that has led to your rather disturbed stalking.
Sorry, left out the rabbit ears part.
Slander is spoken. Or resident tell here prefers libel.
Well, that explains the “prison guard” comment. I thought what the heck?!?!
@jwm, your stalker was probably a former inmate.
Ralph, I worked for a non profit that provided services for inmates and their families. The inmates watched out for me better than the guards did.
But being in amongst them from day to day was a real education.
“Thank god we got penitentiaries. I asked him, why did you kill all the people in the house? Because dey was home.”
I am one veteran who refutes what that individual said.
While I am always open to conversation about gun control, I never forget that WE are the last line of defense from everything.
Stick to your guns! (heh, heh)…
Ignorant Ass Monkeys have to prove ignorance and stupidity on a regular basis
I don’t “do” social media and I try hard to avoid morons in real life. But if somebody told me that they were just waiting for an order to confiscate my guns, I’d tell him not to wait. Just come over right away. I’ll be waiting.
I don’t expect that I’d ever see him again.
Then again, I’m a mean old bastard and likely to be taken seriously.
As we say in my family “Don’t let fear stop you little man!”
He’s waiting/hoping for the “order” because he is too small a man to make the decision for himself. He has obviously never seen the movie “Judgement at Nuremburg” nor read anything of the Second World War.
He is also a coward who believes that if the order is given he will have an entire squad, platoon, company, army to back him up when you/we/I start shooting back. As a veteran myself I somehow doubt that the blind compliance to an order to violate the Constitutionally protected rights of American citizens, Posse Comitatus nothwithstanding, will be universal within the military structure, at all levels of command.
“He is also a coward who believes that if the order is given he will have an entire squad, platoon, company, army to back him up”
He’s gonna need them.
When someone bleats “weapons of war”, I sure do wish that the immediate reply be “name one army on the planet that uses semi-automatic rifles in battle”.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but aren’t most FN FAL rifles semi-auto only? I thought that most nations dropped the full-auto feature because the recoil made it too inaccurate to be useful.
Which is why, in the Falklands, the Brits threw away their under-powered rifles and picked up the full auto rifles captured from the Argentines.
Beat me to it. Was going to post that exact example.
Only the British with their L1A1 were the only military during the postwar period to neuter a full-auto designed gun to semi-only. No one else did. They also don’t use it anymore which should be telling.
Automatic fire still has a place otherwise no armies would still have that function on their rifles.
Full auto was never about accuracy. It’s purely about suppressive fire. Semi auto is fine for most situations… Until of course you need suppressive fire, or happen to be facing a large force.
Using this only concedes that citizens are not expected to own full-auto. As someone who would love nothing more than for the NFA to rightfully be found unconstitutional, or at a minimum the 86 FOPA closing of the machine gun registry to be found unconstitutional, I’d prefer to avoid ceding that point.
It doesn’t concede anything and the NFA, etc. is a totally different issue.
Agreed. We have a right to own “weapons of war.” I always cringe when I hear people saying, “No, it wasn’t fully automatic ‘assault rifle.’ It was only a semi-auto!” Who the heck cares? We have a right to keep and bear both.
Don’t be surprised. Many people say the military (and police) will not back a gun grab, but I think many would. I know an ex-Marine (in his case I don’t believe “once a Marine, always a Marine) who is now working in law enforcement (currently a prison guard but wants to be a cop) who is against both against citizens being able to carry and military on base being able to carry.
He’s part of the elite, you aren’t.
Some will and some won’t. Our job is to be open to those that will. Create friends and supporters, not enemies.
After all, those blanket ‘all soldiers” “all cops” statements are as sensible as claiming adam lanza represents all ar15 owners.
“If you’re not a cop, you’re ‘little people.'”
— Blade Runner (1982)
One word: Katrina
I personally would count on LEO and career military following gun confiscation orders, if only to keep their pay checks, benefits and pensions. The low guys on the military totem pole may or may not, depending on the .gov dependence.
I got that quote last time you said it, great movie, ahead of its time.
When I was in the Army 30 some years ago they made a point in Basic Training to teach us that we were NOT required to follow an illegal order. Even if you were then brought up on charges the fact that the order required you to perform an illegal or unconstitutional act was your perfect defense. Then and now I would consider an order to confiscate weapons from civilians an unconstitutional and therefore illegal order.
I guess they don’t stress that as much in military training any more.
Any Army’s greatest fear is indiscipline. Not every soldier has to refuse, not even a majority. Even a 10% refusalrate might be enough to keep the troops in their barracks.
Is something a weapon of war just because it looks like a weapon of war?
If that’s they case, then you must ban all revolvers (S&W M1917), all pistols (M1911, M11, etc), all shotguns (Mossbergs and Benellis galore), all bolt-action rifles (M1903, Remington 700), all lever-action rifles (Winchester 1894), all semi-auto rifles (M110 SASS), and even all knives (Fairbairn-Sykes, Ka-Bar, etc).
So when you say “Weapons of war have no place on our streets,” then you’re saying either “I’m extremely ignorant” or “I want all guns banned.”
Let us know how that works out.
And Jeeps and Humvees, too.
Indeed – the Muskets to which leftists say we should be restricted were also weapons of war. So we can have Muskets, but we can’t have weapons of war? Those are irreconcilable statements.
Playing the victim card? Weak sauce. Toughen up or get off the internet.
“My god, it’s full of assholes!”
Son-of-a-gun! HAL really IS sentient! ?
Awesome. I totally heard Dave Bowman when I read that.
We’ll played, sir.
Should we be able to own our own Apache helicopter??
Notice the text…”Private armed brig.” So private companies and individuals could own ships with Cannons! Yes Cannons!! OMG! Cannons! It had 18 Carriage guns! and Privately held!
Yeppers, you are correct in that you can own any aircraft fully fitted with armament if you can qualify. Problem is you cannot fly it with the armament on board. To fly any aircraft licensed to non military, all weapons must be removed. Shooting them on the ground is ok though.
” To fly any aircraft licensed to non military, all weapons must be removed.”
I’m not so sure about that, and I have an example:
Feral hog hunting in Texas with machine guns from helicopters is a popular (albeit expensive) recreational activity.
I imagine it may be legal to buy a surplus ‘Nam-era Huey and hang a legally transferred Mini-gun on it and do the same thing…
Report him to his chain of command starting at the company level, than Battalion, Brigade, Division and stopping at the Army chief of staff. Also inform both your and his Congressman of this matter . He took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and he wants to be a giant d-bag on social media making statements unbecoming an officer either warrant or Commissioned. People like him is why the founders wrote the 3rd Amendment.
If you get far enough up the chain of command they’ll probably promote him for it.
What’s depressing is you are probably correct.
“When Advocating For Freedom And Gun Rights, Expect To Be Threatened.”
My response . . . Bring it!
I was threatened by a military service member. He called me a “crazy anarchist” and said he hopes he gets the order to take guns away so that he can personally take mine.
….and people really think the military has common civilians best interests in mind. Just remember who they really take orders from.
Easy with the broad brush, dude. Not all soldiers would comply with such an order; in fact, many wouldn’t.
There’s a youtube video where someone was interviewing the IN NG because they were in a city performing duties the videographer didn’t think they should be doing. Their response was that they do what they are ordered to do. So he then asked several of them if they would confiscate firearms if ordered to and some said yes, others would not comment.
I used to be a member of a gun forum that had a lot of cops as members. The older cops said that the veteran cops probably wouldn’t confiscate guns, but that they didn’t trust the younger cops that departments were hiring today.
“If people can’t control their own emotions, then they have to start to control other people’s behavior.” – Robin Skynner
That guy is a text book bully. Has to be tough on the internet as per usual.
Immaturity, well past “adulthood” is the sad fact in society today. It’s just much more pronounced with the anonymity of the internet.
It’s a pity certain jobs don’t screen for immaturity of lack of emotional control when it comes to professions that should require solid logic and objective decision-making. I miss the days when intelligence was celebrated, not hipster and contrarian crap.
I think the gun-controllers are suckering us in using the question: “Do you think that an ordinary citizen has a right to own a . . . ?”
And we LOVE to take the bait. We probably have the right philosophy; but the important question is whether we have the right TACTICS? Can we figure out the difference between philosophy vs. TACTICS?
I think the correct response is this: “To the People who ratified the 2A, what do you imagine their response would be to the question ‘Does a gentleman have the right to carry a brace of pistols on the streets of New York City or Baltimore?’ Well, then, does a single mother of color have a right to carry a double-barrel derringer on the streets of NYC or Baltimore today?”
We don’t need to debate the difference between a muzzle-loader vs. an AR-15. Let’s begin with the most comparable pair of cases between the 18th century vs. the 21st century. Just when was it that the single mother of color lost a right presumed – nationally – to be a natural right of a gentleman in the 18th century? When did this happen? How did it happen? Was it in the opinion of Chief Justice Rodger Taney in Dred Scott? Or, in Cruikshank? Is the 14A a dead-letter? Or, is it Heller? Or McDonald that is the dead-letter?
Before we debate the Star Wars light saber and The Force; let us start our study with the smallest step we can find. Just when was it that a gentleman’s right to bear a brace of pistols was lost to the single mother of color to carry a derringer? Once we find the justification for this argument we can begin to resolve the gun-control debate.
Who knows? Maybe we will find it in the jurisprudence of Dred Scott! Or Cruikshank! Or some other place. That will be real progress.
That’s brilliant; I’m gonna remember that one. Thanks
Weapons of war: Muskets, Trap Door Springfields, Lever Actions, Bolt Actions, Revolvers, Pistols, Simi-auto rifles, oh and machine guns.
So they have basically outlawed one item on the list, look for the anti freedom crowd to come after everything they think they can get. They want the US to be like the UK and Europe.
Bows, crossbows, swords, spears, machetes, knives…..Even rocks have been used as weapons of war. When does the banning stop?
You’d think one thing that wouldn’t be on the list would the the AR-15, as it was never a weapon of war and still isn’t. Would have been back in the day, but not in the modern era (even since before the AR-15 was first developed) as, realistically, only select-fire rifles would meet the definition.
You forgot a sling. David and Goliath and all that…
Rocks. I did remember the ammo.
You forgot this one:
Judges 15:16King James Version (KJV)
16 And Samson said, “With the jawbone of an ass, heaps upon heaps, with the jaw of an ass have I slain a thousand men.”
That would be a difficult weapon of war to use these days. Most Democrat politicians have very small jaws.
But they are giant asses, so…
The irony. You point out democide as a reason for the citizenry owning firearms and then he goes on to prove your point for you.
Side note, my in-law called my wife and I “potential murders” because we own “assault rifles” on a DerpBook post. That thread descended into some of the most vitriolic crap I’ve ever read on an internet argument.
Progressive ideology trumps family. I’m reminded of a time in history where there was “brother against brother” in a certain political dispute that eventually turned bloody.
A Progressive is, above all else, a Progressive *first*…
Wait, “weapons of war don’t belong in an uncontrolled setting?”
You mean an uncontrolled setting like, for instance, a war?
Maybe TTAG needs a weapons of war on the street photo collection. Take your weapons of war, put them on the street and take pictures. Post them on facebook as bait.
I won’t take the obvious bait on nuclear weapons. Those kind of weapons self select. If someone really wanted to buy one, then knock yourself out. The problem is they are prohibitively expensive to own, operate, and maintain. They have the potential to be deadly without even being detonated. Most people that have the money to buy the ability to create and maintain a nuclear weapon wouldn’t want anything to do with it. It doesn’t make money, and it is a PITA to own. Even military aircraft are prohibitively expensive to own and operate. Yes there are people who own old jets and other fighter aircraft, but they are few and far between. So, I avoid engaging with the mental midgets who spew the “should people own nukes stupidity”.
True enough, but I do enjoy reminding those same people that many private parties DO own multiple thousands of tanks, military aircraft, cannons, and more, as they include all of those things in the list of “thank god people can’t own XYZ,” too. I like to link to sites where you can buy these things at auction — from Sherman tanks to fairly modern howitzers, troop transports, ICBM carrier/launchers, etc etc haha
My understanding is that you can own artillery, such as a 105mm howitzer. It’s the type of ammo that’s restricted. No HE, chemical rounds, etc. Solid shot is good.
I’m trying to visualize the size of the dies and press for that 105…
Well put. There are so many safety issues surrounding the ownership and storage of nuclear weapons – or other WMDs – that it isn’t a matter of “can” someone own one, but can they “safely” own one. My firearms have zero risk of going kaboom on their own, whether stored in a safe, back of the pickup truck, or under a bed. Further, they won’t leak out any deadly toxins or radioactivity that might sneak across the road and infiltrate passers-by. Guns are inert unless specifically loaded and fired – WMDs, not necessarily.
Interesting point. Can anybody find or quote an actual law that specifies that an American citizen may not legally own or possess a nuclear weapon?
I own guns precisely because authoritarian statists like this exist.
Man if someone threatened my wife I’d find him. WE got yer back Sara. No I don’t trust ex-military types more than anyone else. Lots of unhinged cops come from their ranks. My own kid is less than enthusiastic about all of us “gun nuts”. He fought for ”murica and believes his opinion has more value than his dad. And why is everything blocked out??? I thought he’s some kind of badazz…
FWW, a lot of sons think that they’re smarter than their dads. Then one day they realize that the older the son gets, the smarter his dad gets.
My dad my dumber than a post when I was eighteen, six years later when I got out of the Navy he was a lot smarter. I think he must have been going to night school while I was gone.
Some animals are more equal than others.
Court martial his taxpayer funded military ass. Throw him in jail for the rest of his life. Or capital punishment for threatening a civilian.
I think what this guy means by he is in the “military” is that he has prestiged once or twice on Call of Duty. Nothing to worry about from this douchebag Mrs. Tipton. He is of no threat to any of us and would likely be in the rear with the gear as a few others have pointed out here.
I do agree with your point on social media. It in general, is a disgusting cesspool of hate and vitriol. Keyboard warriors are very brave behind the safe walls of their homes. Unfortunately one of the downsides to the Internet is that disagreements turn incredibly nasty quickly. No one would ever say most of what I see out there to anyone’s face directly. We have turned into a society of instant insults and mudslinging. The art of debate is gone and there is no more, “we can simply agree to disagree” and peacefully move on with life. Now everyone makes threats and wants detractors rounded up into interment camps. Society has definitely devolved and I truly hope there is no major economic or government collapse. If there was I think the movie The Purge would look G rated versus what you would see on our streets.
I am too old to appreciate the utility of social media, I guess, so I do not participate. If I did, however, and some asshat like this guy started his bullshit I’m pretty sure my response would be “FVCK YOU” and then block him. Life is too short and otherwise full of enjoyable things to waste any of it on fools like him.
When and if he ever showed up at my door would be time enough to spend a few minutes and a few rounds communicating with him.
the Military is a mixed bag of people who’s ideals typically represent their home states
The leftist rhetoric lately is piling up great heaps of evidence that to be an anti- you have to be mentally ill. On different forums, left-leaning antis read what I say and then attack me as though I’ve said the exact opposite, or pretend I said something that isn’t there at all.
One of the worst refuses to even read Article I Section 8 clause 16, because he doesn’t think Congress needs any assignment of authority to deal with guns.
What exactly was homeboy’s thesis to prove that “this mess in AFG” was caused by armed civilians?
I was over there for a year and don’t remember seeing any armed civilians, just armed boy-rapists in blue jumpsuits extorting and abusing their own populace under color of law.
Also, a couple people have alluded to this, but pro tip from an Army Infantry vet: when someone says “I used to be in the military” it usually means they were Air Force, Navy, or nothing military at all. Army and Marines always name their service, and will often name their sub-branch.
Marines and most Army are the real soldiers. I’m admitting that as an Air Force vet.
That’s true. I wouldn’t call myself a soldier. I would call myself a sailor, or more precisely a submariner. And damn proud of it.
Guardiano, I saw lot’s of armed civilians. Fought like hell against them. Oddly enough, they were carrying the weapons of the invaders and occupiers who had tried to take their country from them. Something that I would hope our fellow brothers and sisters in arms would remember.
JW – you were probably over there earlier in the war than I was. By the time I got there, we called your armed civilians “The Taliban.” But your point is an excellent one, and one I’ve used many times in this type of argument. If unlettered, barely-trained tribesmen in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam can fight the greatest military in the world to a standstill, why, so can we.
I have ARNG annual training coming up in July, and I think I’m going to use my railroad tracks as a bully pulpit to talk to my dudes (and one supply clerk dudette) about that oath we all swore to the Constitution, not the federal government or even the governor of PA. And I might run through some democide stats, lingering on Wounded Knee, Sand Creek, and Waco, just for extra impact.
I bet you dollars to donuts that your “military member” is a poser. Pacifist dorks tend to identify as someone else when trying to confront reality because they’re not really comfortable with reality (if you know what I mean. lol).
Final response should have been, “I hope you are the first guy through the door. Come and take ’em you punk ass bitch.” But the homo is probably a friend of a friend or relative and you were trying to keep it civil. Civility doesn’t work on the internet.
Who else loves the irony that they’ll require the use of weapons to confiscate weapons?
The use of physical violence during rallies to suppress opposing opinion?
Face it anti-gun folks– You’ll use a the gun you purportedly hate based on any number of flimsy justifications.
Please don’t black out the names and photos of these morons. Let them embarass themselves in the public forum they chose.
Oh that’s what that is? Looked like she drew large black penises over the names of those dickheads.
The last time I checked, our military gives every new member instruction that lasts a few days. During that qualification /training, they learn to operate a rifle and hit stationary targets at pre-set ranges for points. THAT pretty much sums up military firearms training. And their commanders tell them when they can (and must) use guns issued to them for limited periods of time – for designated purposes. The Military should not be the standard for judging anything when it comes to the protected right of civilians to obtain, keep and bear arms for use AS NEEDED.
Mr. Noel I don’t know when the last time you checked was, but that is not the current training for at least the last 15 years. At Ft. Benning, in 2001, we got our rifles at the end of week 2 and we took them out pretty much every day after that, for 11 weeks (without OSUT). We learned to shoot known and unknown distances from multiple positions, and spent a whole lot of time on maneuvering with weapons. Once Basic is over, how much you handle a rifle will depend on your MOS and specific assignment. For some it’s every day all day, for some it’s just qualification each year.
Yeah, Day two at Parris Island we were issued M16A2s and carried them until week 12. We do have a standard range qualification, but as a grunt we were in the field two to three weeks a month training on live fire and maneuver ranges, simmunitions/blank cqb and MOUT. We constantly trained and used our rifles, or in my case machine gun
Another “I saw something on Facebook”-article. Remember the old saying about not arguing with a fool in public? FB is totally liberal. Get off FB and spend your energy elsewhere.
I’m convinced much of what is posted online is intentionally false. Special interests have unlimited amounts of money and resources, and understand that social media, Internet forums, are very important for shaping public opinion.
And when something bad goes down who do you call? The cops of course, and their “weapons of war”. They don’t complain about them then I’d wager.
You have to ask yourself, would this person have the courage to say that to my face?
If the answer is no, don’t bother debating them online.
It is rare that I find the person who would look me in the eye and tell me I’m an idiot and should die and all the other crap people say on the internet. And those rare people are the ones I want to talk to the most.
Kind of like those who commit road rage and/or throw offensive remarks while driving. They will say and do those things when there is a car door between them and their victim, but take away that perceived barrier, they are usually a bit more polite. When we say an armed society is a polite society, it is true. In an armed society, bullies learn rather quickly that their 300 lb beer belly or their 4 hour a day bodybuilding habit is not an excuse to cause trouble.
I doubt he is in the military. First, when I served, the rules around the Posse Comitatus Act were taught ad nauseam. Federal military forces cannot be used to enforce law on citizens unless Martial Law was declared, and there are very specific rules around when it can be used. Sure, Obama has a reputation for violating the law, but I think the left would lose the whole country…and they know that. Regardless, there are very specific rules of conduct by the military even during Martial Law where murder is still murder. Second, although those in the military still have some freedom of speech rights, making wild boasts that they would commit murder if given the order is, well, illegal. I am sure if caught he would be offered an article 15 and given the boot, but if he declined, I am sure it would result in a Court Martial. A few decades ago, when I had been a USAF SP, I saw people get busted for saying far less in the public arena. Of course, things may have changed in the military since I served; however, in my experience, the military may “change” its public face for political appeasement, but internally, it has not changed much in over a century.
Martial law doesn’t have to be declared. There are exceptions written (amended) into the law. Military can be used where drugs are involved is one example. I’m sure you remember Waco. Military was there. Clinton signed a waiver of Posse Commitatus. All sorts of ways around it.
I had a very satisfying argument last night, with an old friend who is very anti-gun. He has been pitching a fit on social media over the latest gun control measures that were shot down. He was going on about people not doing any research and just yelling opinions, and then referenced Miller vs. United States as a ruling citing no individual right to gun ownership. How he made that logic leap I don’t know, but I pointed out to him if he agrees with Miller that he should have no problem with AR-15 being owned by civilians due to the fact that the government argued that the sawed off 12 ga. was not fit for military purposes.
He must not have done enough research because that immediately shut him up.
I see the problem. You have friends who are liberal idiots.
This is true. I do have some liberal idiot friends. Only because we go way back to high school days. I doubt we would be friends if we had just met recently, but I try to be civil and represent gun owners as thoughtful intelligent people instead of confirming their stereotypes. Maybe reach some that open to reason.
Hey, at least now maybe the military worshipers on TTAG will stop saying I’m lying when I mention the soldiers I know who say they look forward to killing conservatives / libertarians in a civil war.
As opposed to the guys that say they look forward to shooting libs during that same war. There are bad in every group.
Not all soldiers are our enemy. Unless we force them, thru our own ignorance, to be.
My standard response to all such threats:
“I’m your huckleberry.”
^^this. every time.
Um, I think soldier “No guns for you”‘s comment is in violation of FB policies, local and military law.
Reporting “This guy here, identifying himself as active military just threatened me.” would allow FB, local LEO, and the military to their job, which is protecting you. Time to report to all three, plus a press release to assorted media w/ P O C and contact info.
Outlaw the Democratic Party, almost all mass killings come under their watch most likely perpetrated by them in a false flag op! Ignorance and arrogance of the political elite willfully defying out laws! that’s right they are exempt!
The is about 20,000 various gun laws on the books but none enforced so let pass more laws to show we did something maybe start a civil war so we can have Marshall law, suspend the Bill of rights and be a Dictator ship lead by the most corrupt and inept people we can find including military top brass!