Holder says today that they WILL reinstate AWB

[Charles Church]

SavageEagle: "Holder needs a damn reality check. How about we give him one." Well, i'm pretty sure we could make that happen!

[SavageEagle]

Weeeeelllll.......

How's about it. Let's do it. Obviously Welcome to RIGHTtoKeepAndBearArms.com (2AM)'s idea of sending 2x4's isn't really working out, but they have other good ideas. Go to the Tea Party in Chicago. Help plan a Rally here in Indy. Write Holder and tell him what a douche he is very polite like. Buy more guns. Open Carry every day. Grab a rifle and sling it with you when you go out. Contribute to the NRA, GOA, 2nd Amendment Patriots, and any other Pro-2nd Amendment group.

The only other choice we have is a true SHTF scenario and God Help America if it ever comes to that. (No i do not wish, nor advocate such an act. I mearly point out the worst case scenario.)

[barbedwiresmile]

Originally Posted by flagtag

I tried to bring up that second link and was "denied" - blocked.

Strange. Try going into the main link barbedwiresmile

[barbedwiresmile]

Originally Posted by HICKMAN

Sorry, the members of the Guard would NEVER let that happen... they are made up of people like us.

First, they've already done it. Perhaps you have heard of Hurricane Katrina?

Second, I explain how it will happen on my site - exactly as it has always happened with otherwise well-meaning citizens who act as agents of the state. The 20th centurty is full of examples.


Will they really do it?

I have read several articles where writers assert their belief that American soldiers will not fire on American citizens. History is unkind to those who share this view. In fact, history is abundant with examples of soldiers and police all too willing to turn their guns on their fellow citizens.

First, understand that soldiers and police will have limited information. They will be told there is a domestic terrorist on the loose – or better a group of terrorists. They will be told this group has committed horrific acts against Americans. They will be told it’s a boogey-man – a Timothy McVeigh – or a group of boogey-men: right wing wackos or left wing terrorists, perhaps they will have funny sounding names.

Next, forces will be deployed outside their native geography. We saw this in New Orleans with the Chicago Police, among others, rounding up civilian-owned firearms. This can also be seen within states as out-of-town police are brought in for ‘crowd control’. This will eliminate a natural barrier to the use of force – familiarity.

Next, the process will be subtle. There will be no widespread rebellion or civil disturbance. Rather we will see isolated flare-ups and abuse of power as the state crushes dissent with overwhelming force and makes up facts as they go along. Sometimes these facts come out later (think Ruby Ridge). Other times the facts never come out (think Waco).

Finally, as we have seen so vividly in recent times, both soldiers and police (is there really a distinction today?) will follow their orders. That’s what they are trained to do.

[barbedwiresmile]

Originally Posted by homeless

I see no difference in the prohabition of drugs, alcohol, or firearms. I for one stand for freedom, and phohibitive bans of any kind and a disgrace to me.

I think you will enjoy this:

Drugs, self-defense, and the state

Drugs, self defense and the state barbedwiresmile

[HICKMAN]

Originally Posted by barbedwiresmile

First, they've already done it. Perhaps you have heard of Hurricane Katrina?

Second, I explain how it will happen on my site - exactly as it has always happened with otherwise well-meaning citizens who act as agents of the state. The 20th centurty is full of examples.

Pardon me, have you ever served? I served both in the Army and the Indiana National Guard. We're not mindless drones, thank you.

Were you ever in NO during Katrina or did you just read about it on the Internet? Troops did fire back on people shooting at them and did sweep houses for abandonded guns because gangs of thugs were out looking for them while looting.

Soldiers are not cops, and don't just follow orders blindly.

[nighthawk80]

TheHill.com - Pelosi throws cold water on weapons ban

Pelosi tosses cold water on assault-weapon ban
By Mike Soraghan
Posted: 02/26/09 11:59 AM [ET]
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tossed cold water on the prospect of reinstating the assault weapons ban, highlighting Democrats’ reluctance to take on gun issues.

Attorney General Eric Holder raised the prospect Wednesday that the administration would push to bring back the ban. But Pelosi (D-Calif.) indicated on Thursday that he never talked to her. The Speaker gave a flat “no” when asked if she had talked to administration officials about the ban.


“On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now,” Pelosi said at her weekly news conference. “I think it's clear the Bush administration didn’t do that.”

Outside of the dig at the recent Republican president, that phrase is the stock line of those who don’t want to pass new gun control laws, such as the National Rifle Association.

The White House declined to comment on Holder's remarks, referring reporters to the Department of Justice. The DoJ did not respond to The Hill's request for comment.

[barbedwiresmile]

Originally Posted by HICKMAN

Pardon me, have you ever served? I served both in the Army and the Indiana National Guard. We're not mindless drones, thank you.

I have not said you are. I have spent a significant portion of my life in and around the armed forces community. There is nothing especially positive or negative about members of the armed forces. The only generalization that can be made is that they are human, and remarkably unremarkable when compared to the overall American population. You seem to be taking this very personally. I am not attacking you or members of the armed forces generally. But to suggest my observations have no value is to ignore history.

Were you ever in NO during Katrina or did you just read about it on the Internet? Troops did fire back on people shooting at them and did sweep houses for abandonded guns because gangs of thugs were out looking for them while looting.

Here is an observation posted on my site from a NO resident. I'll let it speak for itself:

matt Says:
February 24, 2009 at 3:55 pm
As a resident of New Orleans who was on the outskirts of town during hurricane katrina following events closely, I can assure anyone reading this that what is being described in this barbedwiresmile post is not only possible, but that it has happened already.
Law abiding, middle and upper class people who were minding their own business in their private residences were rousted, removed at gunpoint, and were forced to hand over their personal weapons by officers and guardsmen from other cities. This occured during a time of lawlessness (that is now whitewashed - you can’t find any articles or information accurately describing the scope of the chaos caused by criminals, gangs, and junkies who were jonesing. But real-time radio reports couldn’t be censored, I suppose, so some people remember the scale of dystopia) when private citizens needed their weapons most.
This was truly disturbing. People around here are generally self reliant. They are hunters and fisherman, and are the last people you would expect to relinquish their firearms, and they did resist. But what options exist, when a dozen national guardsmen bang on the door with their weapons raised, insisting that they have the authority to take your weapons?
What do you do? You either start shooting, or you give it up. Normal, law abiding citizens aren’t conditioned to shoot at uniformed officers. Even the most independent feel compelled to hand over their weapons, despite how wrong they know it to be.
Monopoly of force indeed.

[Lt. Commander]

Originally Posted by Lt. Commander

Just sent this to both of our elites: (feel free to copy and send too if you want)

Dear Senator Lugar (Bayh),

I can't express to you strong enough my objections to ANY kind of additional infringements of my Second Amendment Rights from the Obama administration in the form of an Assault Weapons Ban or H.R. 45 if either ever makes it to a vote. I respectfully remind you that as our Indiana Representative at the U.S. Government level, we are a gun friendly state and take personal protection and owning firearms without being molested by any government very seriously and our voting record will reflect sharply how you represent us as a state.

Regards,

Scott Gerber

Dear Mr. Gerber:

Thank you for sharing with me your concerns about H.R. 45, Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. I appreciate having the benefit of your views.

Representative Rush introduced this legislation in the House of Representatives on January 6, 2009, and it was subsequently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary for further review. Should this or similar legislation come before the Senate, I will consider it carefully with your opposition in mind.

I support the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms for sporting, collecting, and defensive purposes, and I support Indiana law related to the purchase and ownership of firearms.

Again, thank you for contacting me.


Sincerely,


Richard G. Lugar
United States Senator

[haldir]

I got the same exact letter from our thoughtful and responsive senior Senator.