Whitehouse.gov already calling for gun ban

[olddoc]

A good example of what can happen to individual and collective rights is illustrated in The Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn. He discusses how the overwhelming majority of people went into decades of forced labor, torture, and death with almost no struggle. This all starts with the erosion of th 1st and 2nd ammendments. Its why they are not the 12th, or 13th amendments.
I would encourage people to read the above book. It is a good example of something to be avoided at all costs. Unfortunately, it is a loooooong slow read.

[KClapp]

Originally Posted by BryanK

As a member of the Armed Forces myself, I would have to say the time to draw the line would be when they give you orders that defy the constitution. That would not be considered a "lawful" order.

I would caution you on making any decision based on what you believe to be a "lawful order". Whether or not an order is lawful is not your decision, but the decision of your Court Martial board, should you decide not to obey the order given.

I can assure you, that if an order is given with respect to enforcing an enacted law, it is lawful until the SCOTUS decides otherwise, not you.

Your best, first line of defense is to ensure no such law is enacted. After that, if you are not willing to enforce it, then I would highly suggest leaving the military or LE organization in which you belong.

[blowfish]

In reading the book Get Selected, it was stated (and I am paraphrasing) that the lone wolf dies off, while the pack survives. If people are not willing to band together and wage the political battle against gun control, while the price to be paid is in time, money and effort, why should one think that they will band together to fight when the price to be paid is in blood?

The political left in this country has shown a remarkable ability to organize themselves, rally the media, communicate their position to the populace, and make their will known at the polls. Unless gun owners, and to a greater extent those who oppose a socialist/tyrannical state, begin to effectively fight the political battle, we will lose.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by BryanK

As a member of the Armed Forces myself, I would have to say the time to draw the line would be when they give you orders that defy the constitution. That would not be considered a "lawful" order. The oath we all took had that part "To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." When that line is crossed you'll know. Revisit the antics of the Gestapo.
I for one am not going to stand idly by, and watch my rights that my predecessors fought and died for go the way of the dodo. I'm an active NRA member, I instill the knowledge of our rights and freedoms to my son, I vote, and I exercise my first amendment right to my congress critter/local delegates. If everyone did that, someone might listen. The arrogance and ignorance of our fearless leaders astounds me. Back in my lane, out.

While it would be difficult to accomplish, what would you do if they amended the Constitution?

The folly of gun laws banning firearms or ammo is that it is political stunt and if it were put up to a vote of the people the anti-gun nuts would lose hands down.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Paslode

While it would be difficult to accomplish, what would you do if they amended the Constitution?

The folly of gun laws banning firearms or ammo is that it is political stunt and if it were put up to a vote of the people the anti-gun nuts would lose hands down.

I disagree.

"It is for the children. Who needs military style assault weapons? Who needs a magazine holding more than 10 rounds. Why are there "cop killer" bullets for sale? Close the "gun show loophole". Who needs a .50 caliber weapon anyway? Put an end to Saturday Night Specials. Who needs small, easily concealable handguns? Who needs large, high-powered handguns? Who needs "sniper" type weapons with high powered scopes? Why are gun owners not licensed? Why are bullets not ballistically fingerprinted? Why are they not serial numbered? Why should we allow the sale of automatic weapons? Why allow people to buy ammunition over the counter without a license? Why do people need so many guns? Maybe they should be taxed. Why not ban the sale of small caliber handgun ammo? It is only used by the criminals. Why do you need a shotgun that holds more than three rounds? Why not require a means tested license for firearms owners? How can we allow people to carry guns around concealed? It just leads to more violence? Why does anyone need to buy a gun the same day? A waiting period would be a good way for them to cool off. Why does anyone need to buy more than one gun per month? Why do we allow those dangerous ranges here? A bullet might hit my house. Maybe we should ban them, I hear that they are contaminated with toxic substances, like lead and mercury. Why can you buy silencers today? No one uses them but the Mob and assassins? Why should we allow the sale of hollow point and dum-dum bullets? Why do we have so many gun dealers? Surely some of them are doing something illegal? Let's put some of the "bad" ones out of business. Why do those people need so many guns and so much ammo? Send someone to investigate and arrest them."

These are all themes that have been proposed by the anti-gunners and the MSM. Spun properly, any of them could pass a public referendum by the majority in this country, despite the clear agenda and outright conflict oif some of the arguments.

The end result, as the anti-gunners want, is a gradual erosion of 2nd Amendment rights, culminating in a complete ban on private firearms ownership in this country.

This is their idea of a compromise, as they would greatly prefer an immediate repeal of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation of all guns and ammo.

You don't need to repeal the 2nd Amendment, you just need to chip away at it with legislative and legal decisions until it doesn't mean anything anymore.

TR

[KClapp]

Originally Posted by blowfish

The political left in this country has shown a remarkable ability to organize themselves, rally the media, communicate their position to the populace, and make their will known at the polls. Unless gun owners, and to a greater extent those who oppose a socialist/tyrannical state, begin to effectively fight the political battle, we will lose.

I wholeheartedly agree. However, the battle is all but lost. The left has an IO campaign second to none. They have control of the media with only one vestige left for conservative expression (AM talk radio) and they are attempting to quell that outlet. They will silence the opposition. They are firmly entrenched in the public education system from primary to post-secondary. They control the labor organizations. And now, they control two of the three primary branches of government. Thanks to former POTUS' actions such as Lincoln, FDR, and Truman, they have precidence for subduing their opposition through Presidential order. All it will take is some form of internal threat (i.e. terrorist attack or econmic collapse).

I'm not saying give up. However, at some point, we will have a kinship to the Spartans.

[Defender968]

Originally Posted by KClapp

I wholeheartedly agree. However, the battle is all but lost. The left has an IO campaign second to none. They have control of the media with only one vestige left for conservative expression (AM talk radio) and they are attempting to quell that outlet. They will silence the opposition. They are firmly entrenched in the public education system from primary to post-secondary. They control the labor organizations. And now, they control two of the three primary branches of government. Thanks to former POTUS' actions such as Lincoln, FDR, and Truman, they have precidence for subduing their opposition through Presidential order. All it will take is some form of internal threat (i.e. terrorist attack or econmic collapse).

I'm not saying give up. However, at some point, we will have a kinship to the Spartans.

Respectfully KClapp it sounds to me like you are giving up, let me ask you a question, does your congressman and senators know how you feel, have you expressed your views to them in a respectful manner, how about the members of Congress considering the H.R. 25? If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Even though all the things you said may be true we still have one thing that the Dims/Commies/Left wing wackos/ and tree hugging hippies don't have on their side, the constitution and that is a very powerful force, coupled with over 200 years of history of gun ownership I still think we've got the upper hand. This fight is far from over, but it will end much quicker and go very badly for this nation if good folks like you give up.

Just my .02

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I disagree.

"It is for the children. Who needs military style assault weapons? Who needs a magazine holding more than 10 rounds. Why are there "cop killer" bullets for sale? Close the "gun show loophole". Who needs a .50 caliber weapon anyway? Put an end to Saturday Night Specials. Who needs small, easily concealable handguns? Who needs large, high-powered handguns? Who needs "sniper" type weapons with high powered scopes? Why are gun owners not licensed? Why are bullets not ballistically fingerprinted? Why are they not serial numbered? Why should we allow the sale of automatic weapons? Why allow people to buy ammunition over the counter without a license? Why do people need so many guns? Maybe they should be taxed. Why not ban the sale of small caliber handgun ammo? It is only used by the criminals. Why do you need a shotgun that holds more than three rounds? Why not require a means tested license for firearms owners? How can we allow people to carry guns around concealed? It just leads to more violence? Why does anyone need to buy a gun the same day? A waiting period would be a good way for them to cool off. Why does anyone need to buy more than one gun per month? Why do we allow those dangerous ranges here? A bullet might hit my house. Maybe we should ban them, I hear that they are contaminated with toxic substances, like lead and mercury. Why can you buy silencers today? No one uses them but the Mob and assassins? Why should we allow the sale of hollow point and dum-dum bullets? Why do we have so many gun dealers? Surely some of them are doing something illegal? Let's put some of the "bad" ones out of business. Why do those people need so many guns and so much ammo? Send someone to investigate and arrest them."

These are all themes that have been proposed by the anti-gunners and the MSM. Spun properly, any of them could pass a public referendum by the majority in this country, despite the clear agenda and outright conflict oif some of the arguments.

The end result, as the anti-gunners want, is a gradual erosion of 2nd Amendment rights, culminating in a complete ban on private firearms ownership in this country.

This is their idea of a compromise, as they would greatly prefer an immediate repeal of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation of all guns and ammo.

You don't need to repeal the 2nd Amendment, you just need to chip away at it with legislative and legal decisions until it doesn't mean anything anymore.

TR

I was basing that on the 2008 polls regarding the 2nd Admendment where the over whelming majority of those polled agreed it was the individual right. But when looking at it from your perspective I see your point, and if put to a national popular vote the result might well replicate the 2009 POTUS Election results.

Put forth this Brady propaganda (interesting they pick DC) and it would sway some people when hyping the effective range. But they fail to mention the prohibitive cost and the unlikely chance of any Average Joe can pull off a 1000 yd shot with a 50 Cal..

http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/...calibermap.pdf

I find it interesting that most of the guns crimes listed on the Brady site occur East of the Mississippi and West of Colorado. It also seems that the vast majority of this incidents are in Democratic States.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/highprofile/

[olddoc]

The legislative misadventure which occurred in my state brought me up out of my chair. I have always left the politics to others- too busy, too tired, didnt want to go to the fundraiser or the dinner. I can guarantee you that this trip around the track I will be much more involved. I would encourage all who can to allocate some of their time and money to making sure the right people get in at the local level and taking it from there. They at least have to worry about bumping into you at Wall-mart and having to explain their vote.

[Blitzzz (RIP)]

BryanK pretty well hit it on the nose. Don't try to mince the "defend" part with following the orders part while they are both vital to the Oath but you must defend the Constitution first against illegal orders (counter the Constitution), Bless us all, Blitzzz.

[BryanK]

Originally Posted by KClapp

I would caution you on making any decision based on what you believe to be a "lawful order". Whether or not an order is lawful is not your decision, but the decision of your Court Martial board, should you decide not to obey the order given.

I can assure you, that if an order is given with respect to enforcing an enacted law, it is lawful until the SCOTUS decides otherwise, not you.

Your best, first line of defense is to ensure no such law is enacted. After that, if you are not willing to enforce it, then I would highly suggest leaving the military or LE organization in which you belong.

Duly noted. However to clarify what I meant by not adhering to a lawful order would be in the instance of Uncle Sam telling me to go door to door ransacking houses to claim Citizens arms by any means necessary, or something to that effect. That would be a very clear violation of our rights as US Citizens.

[KClapp]

Originally Posted by Defender968

Respectfully KClapp it sounds to me like you are giving up, let me ask you a question, does your congressman and senators know how you feel, have you expressed your views to them in a respectful manner,

Yes, they do. And I have written them on matters concerning more than just firearms ownership. One of them has an automated email response that pretty much tells me, in a very politically-correct manner, that my views are irrelevant to him as he knows what is best for me.

how about the members of Congress considering the H.R. 25?

Yup, same as the senators. And my congressional representative knows better than me what is best for me also. Just ask him.

To demonstrate the futility of writing your representatives, consider what happened with the first bailout bill. Reports indicated that the correspondence received from constituents was overwhelmingly against the bailout. But the constituents were ignored. We have a problem Houston.

Even though all the things you said may be true we still have one thing that the Dims/Commies/Left wing wackos/ and tree hugging hippies don't have on their side, the constitution and that is a very powerful force,

It's a powerful force only if your view of the Constitution is supported by the majority of the SCOTUS judges. The fact that the two primary political parties try to stack the deck within the Supreme Court, in order to get rulings that support their political ideology, tells me the Constitution has been relegated to near irrelevance.

I'm sure Leonidas and crew understood their situation. I know I understand mine. While my cause may be lost, I will die with my boots on and standing, because I believe in what I'm defending and my honor demands it.

Originally Posted by BrianK

Duly noted. However to clarify what I meant by not adhering to a lawful order would be in the instance of Uncle Sam telling me to go door to door ransacking houses to claim Citizens arms by any means necessary, or something to that effect. That would be a very clear violation of our rights as US Citizens.

Unfortunately, just such an order can be made both lawful and Constitutional given the right conditions.

[echoes]

Originally Posted by KClapp

It's a powerful force only if your view of the Constitution is supported by the majority of the SCOTUS judges.

Have to disagree with you on this point, sir.

Maybe around my camp we are dilusional, but we still write to our local newspapers and elected officials, when they make the wrong call.
Believe that it is Our duty as American citizens, to challenge, cry-foul, and make Our voices heard, when those represented to serve us and
(you, Our brave soldiers), are outta line.

JMHO,

Holly

[rocknrolla]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Well, all those who believed the bullshit about the Dims not wanting to take your guns, try and get your votes back (again).

The leopard does not change his spots.

They have two years of unrestricted opportunity to issue legislation attacking our 2nd Amendment rights, and the only thing which could stop them is the SCOTUS, which is about evenly divided.

Contact your legislators, probably Dims, and see if they will buck the Pelosi and Reid agenda.

I strongly suspect that in most cases, they will not.

We are not seen as constituents to them, just rednecks clinging to guns and religion.

Change you can believe in indeed.

TR

These are the same dims who "promised" bipartisan talks across the board on all legislation. Hold the presses! Their first major bill through Congress is being forced through with - here's the shocker - ZERO Republican support!

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,2499691.story

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by rocknrolla

These are the same dims who "promised" bipartisan talks across the board on all legislation. Hold the presses! Their first major bill through Congress is being forced through with - here's the shocker - ZERO Republican support!

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,2499691.story