breaking an unconstitutional law makes you a patriot not a felon.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Active Shooter in El Paso???
- Thread starter Nik H
- Start date
But the good part is least in the final days, you will be among true Americans, not just the fales an lipp'ers. An just look at this way, those who were trained for export get to apply their wears in a land where they don't stick out. May get way more mileage in the closing days if they really want to dance an play tag.
LOLOLOL. you think 10% will "easily be put down". Lmao. 1% would cause major issues.
A semi auto center fire f***s .gov agents up. That's why they want to ban them.
LMAO. I think if you are going to hold up in your house against 30 PD officers and agents or more and think you have a chance, you have lost it. Only way you survive that is if you have lots of goodies, back up or a hidden escape route lol. But this lone range bravado crap is laughable. That’s my point, the ones who will stand up and think they have a chance are so fractured and unorganized in most cases, their fight will end before it begins. There may be some groups that have banned together and have some idea of how to stave off some unconstitutional bullshit, but I’d wager that most don’t. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard people say, they will have to pry it from my cold dead hands while I will fight them in my house. That’s laughable. They aren’t going to give you warning and are smart enough to come raid your house ninja style at 3 am while you are fast asleep. We only have a chance as a group or groups of people. Anything else would be suicide.
The lone man holed up in his house isn't the only way things will play out.
Some people will go that way, many others will wise up and will go on the offensive. Use your imagination.
Oh they will get the first houses they come for.
After that they will all die lol. People will form ambushes/attacks/etc.
And even though you might not win against 30 tyrants. You will take 1-10 with you and they will quickly run out of people.
These pussies hide outside when there is a 14 year old with a gun. What are they going to do when they start running up against seasoned war veterans some of who unfortunately don't really care if they make it.
There's a lot of rural areas where every house has multiple guns. good luck.
The reality is they will never go door to door. They play the long game and will destroy guns in popular culture so there won't be enough people that want them or have the skills to use them. IE banning anything gun related in schools and expelling people for chewing a pot tart into a gun
After that they will all die lol. People will form ambushes/attacks/etc.
And even though you might not win against 30 tyrants. You will take 1-10 with you and they will quickly run out of people.
These pussies hide outside when there is a 14 year old with a gun. What are they going to do when they start running up against seasoned war veterans some of who unfortunately don't really care if they make it.
There's a lot of rural areas where every house has multiple guns. good luck.
The reality is they will never go door to door. They play the long game and will destroy guns in popular culture so there won't be enough people that want them or have the skills to use them. IE banning anything gun related in schools and expelling people for chewing a pot tart into a gun
I think it will only take a few raids on sleeping homeowners before the coin is flipped and the attackers quickly become the defenders. I hope it never happens but if it does I think 10% is a very low number. It will start with less than 1% but that 1% will grow quickly. If that happens both sides lose.
IMHO, there won't be door-to-door confiscations because it would be brutally violent for all involved. That would include officer-gungrabber returning home to see the fire dept putting his house out or getting a surprise load of 00 to the back of the noggin when getting into his car early one morning. The politicians are smart enough to know better. All they have to do is outlaw weapons or certain weapons. A lot of folks would give them up just because it was illegal and others will just hold on to them. Eventually granddads (your) guns get handed over when they ship your ass off to the nursing home.
That’s exactly what will happen and despite the means, they still win.
In the end, they still win.
Here's another take on the shooter's manifesto - saying it was more socialist/democrat BS than conservative. BTW, that was my takeaway as well.
https://www.redstate.com/darth641/2019/08/05/el-paso-shooter-democrat-supporter/
https://www.redstate.com/darth641/2019/08/05/el-paso-shooter-democrat-supporter/
That's what england thought long ago when only farmers had enough. Then only 3 % stood up an said no, an the rest per-say is history.
Nothing is over until it's over, but giving up/in before it's really began is telling.
Ha, I ain’t giving up. I’m just trying to rile people up. Even tho, I don’t think there is as many of us as people think. Everyone is a patriot until it’s time to meet up and put up. This ain’t the 1770’s.
I’m hearing all kinds of people on the radio this morning that’s all ready to sell us down river for red flag laws as a reasonable thing to do. That’s just buying time and encouraging implementing a system bound to be ripe with abuse.
There are more groups out there that don't lavish or partake of the net, than do. Not everything is as it seems to some eyes,...
I don't think history bears out your foregone conclusion just yet...…………...
If you don't think you can, you won't. If you think you can, you will.
Everything I've meant to convey has already been conveyed.
The grabbers will be (already are?) parsing through whatever has been said here, with an element of bias that is uniquely Democratic (Capital "D").
We shall all reap as the most extreme here have sown.
Red flags are in our futures. I have always obeyed the law, good or bad, and now is no time to abandon that. The rest of you will do as your conscience and guts allow.
Pointing fingers, complaining, or swearing violence before God and man may give comfort, but none of that does any of us any good.
I will ride this ship to wherever it ends up; above or below the surface.
Greg
The grabbers will be (already are?) parsing through whatever has been said here, with an element of bias that is uniquely Democratic (Capital "D").
We shall all reap as the most extreme here have sown.
Red flags are in our futures. I have always obeyed the law, good or bad, and now is no time to abandon that. The rest of you will do as your conscience and guts allow.
Pointing fingers, complaining, or swearing violence before God and man may give comfort, but none of that does any of us any good.
I will ride this ship to wherever it ends up; above or below the surface.
Greg
I do mind unconstitutional red flag laws and will fight if/when they try that crap in my state/Alamo. Fight, move, dig in or kiss the ring. Your choice. I’ve made mine. Only God has the right to judge me. For every sane person you can present I can find a mob that will argue they are crazy, insane, unstable, ect.
Red flag laws are ripe for abuse! That is the issue! We are to expect those agencies who clearly have people that operate above the law to somehow apply it fairly to us? Come on. That’s the issue. Why should I entrust my God given rights to some gov agency? The founders were clear and I happen to agree with that, protection no matter the means is a natural right that no gov entity has any right to take, period. Yes I get that there are crazy people out there and that they should be stopped but you cannot punish the whole for a few bad actors. That’s not freedom. We are either free, or we aren’t.
I get it, but this gives them more power. More power equals less freedom, always. Death by 1000 cuts. The ball is the 2A, any reasonable restriction is already unreasonable. As I’ve said, the time to storm the castle has long passed. If you can’t see this as a slow roll to complete disarmament then I’m not sure what more to say. Again I say, at best, he bought us some time, which is basically what his entire presidency has been.
You are living in a fantasy world if you think there is any chance you will get "due process" with these vile evil communist "red flag" laws.
If you actually had due process, there would be no need for them as there are plenty of laws on the books that take care of it.
What red flag laws are, is simply a Communist tool to kill you and take your stuff unlawfully.
Every one of them lets just about anyone make an "anonymous" complaint against you and they NEVER have to show up on the witness stand to defend their actions under threat of perjury. In clear violation of the constitution.
They all send the goon squad to steal from you, kill you, destroy your life first and then maybe if you get lucky and pay for a good lawyer you might one day get your property back. Again in clear violation of the constitution.
Sure in your fantasy land you'll get due process but NOPE it won't be happening so might as well understand it for what it is and go balls to the walls fighting against the Communists being allowed to put laws into place to attack you.
Just watched Trumps speech. Other than his mentioning of his bump stock ban and his favor of red flag laws, it wasn't bad. He stated "Hatred and Mental illness pulls the trigger, not the gun." At least he had the balls to say that. His 4 point plan wasn't bad either. None mentioned any further bans or universal background checks. When mentioning his red flag laws, he specifically said "rapid due process" instead of "i like taking the guns first, then due process."
The other problem with red flag laws that is rarely discussed is the lack of consequences for the accuser.
If the person who has been falsely accused is fortunate enough to get his or her firearms back and it is shown that the accuser is full of lies then they must suffer civil and criminal penalties.
Those penalties should include, MANDATORY jail time, fines, restitution for the accused in the form of attorney fees, punitive and exemplary awards to the defendant as well as public apologies.
AFAIK none of the red flag laws in the states that have enacted them have any form of penalties for an accuser who has lied.
If the person who has been falsely accused is fortunate enough to get his or her firearms back and it is shown that the accuser is full of lies then they must suffer civil and criminal penalties.
Those penalties should include, MANDATORY jail time, fines, restitution for the accused in the form of attorney fees, punitive and exemplary awards to the defendant as well as public apologies.
AFAIK none of the red flag laws in the states that have enacted them have any form of penalties for an accuser who has lied.
Rapid due process did not work out so well for many accused of stealing horses or cattle rustling, that were in fact innocent.
Due process also means that the burden of proof should be on the accuser NOT the other way around.
Due process, to put it simply, means that there just has to be a hearing. That's it - just a hearing. American jurisprudence is perverted when the accused has to prove that he or she is fit to own a firearm.
You can bet that millions of ex-wives are sharpening their claws after hearing Trump's speech.
In the 1770's people took pride in their rights and freedom. Now, most will roll over as long as they get to keep their cell phones and gym memberships.
Hard times create good men, good men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times. We are in the "weak men creating hard times" phase.
As long as there is due process, im good with it. In fact, i'd rather true "rapid due process" be the standard. If i were ever the one in question, i would want to "rapidly" be exonerated so i can move on with my life. Due process is due process. The quicker it were to be done with, the better. Now, if "rapid due process" is not, in fact, due process at all, that is obviously an issue.
Prohibited person:
- convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
- who is a fugitive from justice;
- who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802);
- who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
- who is an illegal alien;
- who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
- who has renounced his or her United States citizenship;
- who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or
- who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
You are also forgetting that in a court of law, the Trier of Fact can determine who is more credible. In other words, it is one person's word against another.
The accused is also not charged with a crime. So it is doubtful they would ever get a court appointed attorney if they could not afford one.
So AFAIK, they would have to hire an attorney or appear pro se with a County Prosecutor as opposing counsel.
Given that most court appointed attorneys don't have a good track record the accused may not get a very spirited defense in court. Judges and attorneys laugh at pro se litigants.
So it comes down to one person's word against another's. Let that sink in. The Judge determines who is telling the truth without any supporting testimony or corroborating evidence. I've even seen judges refuse to let certain pieces of evidence admitted and prohibit witnesses from testifying. So it can come down to he said she said.
Put an anti-gun female judge on the bench with an angry estranged wife on the stand as the accuser and the poor guy may not stand much of a chance. Ask me how I know this stuff.
The item highlighted in RED above.
It usually takes a lot of steps to get someone adjudicated as a mental defective or get them committed. What the ERPO folks are asking for, whether they realize it or not, is for it to come down to one person making an accusation and for a single judge to make the determination based on that accusation.
If anyone thinks that I am worrying about nothing then you probably haven't been involved in very many divorce cases or criminal trials.
Unfortunately they will be the people running the nursing homes we may have to spend our golden years in.
to me, there isn't any law or "restriction" that's going to stop these mass shootings. period. even if the government came and collected every "registered" weapon we all own, these mass shootings would still happen if not increase. JMHO. Laws are only for the good guys. we'll be the ones who suffer from this, not the "mentally ill" living in their moms basement that they call a fort.
My issue with red flag laws is the lack of due process, a simple accusation by a “concerned party” as all it takes to have the cops confiscate every firearm related item you have for an indefinite amount of time.
As someone who is dating in a borderline blue county the odds of going on a date with a woman that, unbeknownst to me, is an anti-gun liberal is far higher than I am comfortable betting my rights against. All it would take is for her to provide the texts showing our dinner plans, say I threatened her in the parking lot after dinner and the cops would be at my door when I got home from work the next day.
Honestly the whole Red Flag thing is bullshit to begin with, if they are dangerous enough to the accuser that it warrants the removal of their firearms then they shouldn’t be out on the street in general. Let us not forget that the death toll of even the worst mass shooting in the US is still 30 short of what one pissed off drunk ex-boyfriend achieved with nothing more than $1 worth of gasoline.
The smell of piss 24/7 an crys of pain no matter what kind does not appeal to me. The cry of the wild or MAGA is a more befitting end to some,...
Last edited:
Add registered democrats and their spawn to the list of prohibited persons.
That alone would prevent 99% of mass shootings.
That alone would prevent 99% of mass shootings.
This. And some people may simply not be vocal or expressionist at all about their affiliations or feelings/beliefs. To everyone around him, he is just an ordinary Joe. But he is watching and paying attention to everything that is going on. That is exactly the type of people that voted Trump into office in the first place. That is where the term "silent majority" came from, directly from the 2016 election.
None of the highlighted consistently show up in a background either. The biggest issue I see is a bad system of records, HIPAA and Privacy laws that restrict access to information which could help identify prohibited persons.
Just in case there was any confusion at all, I by no means am a supporter of anything like the red flag laws. I was only pointing out Trumps change in word choice when talking about red flag laws. I think trump would sell the 2A community up river for very little gain. I just wanted to go on record ab that. Lol
Anyone that is in support of any unconstitutional law or act is at best naive, at worst mentally defective, crazy, and or lacking what it takes to be a lawful citizen in a free society. When/if the shit starts I will not allow any red flag supporter to be armed in my presence. I have the right of being innocent till found guilty by a jury of my peers. I already have enough stuff hidden at enough locations to simply hand over “what I got” if I find myself in a compromised or massively outnumbered situation. I’m not a easy person to surprise though, and more brainwashed idiots that want to agree with violating anyone’s rights, especially those outlined in the constitution and bill of rights, just drive me to scout out more locations further away. If we were dependent on people like you then America would already be a lost cause.
Which of the three latest shootings would it have prevented? CA Garlic, El Paso, OH?
There were about 2.5 million people in the US in 1776. The size of the Continental Army at any given time during the revolution was no more than about 48,000.
So let's say that about 1/4 of the population at that time was fit for military service. That is about 625,000 able bodied males that could have poured hot lead into the redcoats but didn't.
So at anyone time there was only little over seven percent of the people doing any fighting for freedom and the right to keep and bear arms.
The latest figures that I can find say that as of 2009 there are approximately 310 million firearms available to people in the US.
See page 8: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf
I can't remember where I read it but it was estimated that one of every two households had guns. So that means that out of a population of 327.2 million people that less than 164 million folks own firearms. IMHO, that is a conservative estimate.
We know that only 7 percent of the population ever did any fighting in the US against the British. For today's estimate lets say that only one percent of the gun owners in this country have the stomach for fighting a socialist government intent on confiscating firearms.
That means if only one percent put up a fight the gun banners would be facing 1.6 million very pissed off people with a gadzillion rounds coming their way.
Here endeth the math lesson for the day.
So let's say that about 1/4 of the population at that time was fit for military service. That is about 625,000 able bodied males that could have poured hot lead into the redcoats but didn't.
So at anyone time there was only little over seven percent of the people doing any fighting for freedom and the right to keep and bear arms.
The latest figures that I can find say that as of 2009 there are approximately 310 million firearms available to people in the US.
See page 8: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf
I can't remember where I read it but it was estimated that one of every two households had guns. So that means that out of a population of 327.2 million people that less than 164 million folks own firearms. IMHO, that is a conservative estimate.
We know that only 7 percent of the population ever did any fighting in the US against the British. For today's estimate lets say that only one percent of the gun owners in this country have the stomach for fighting a socialist government intent on confiscating firearms.
That means if only one percent put up a fight the gun banners would be facing 1.6 million very pissed off people with a gadzillion rounds coming their way.
Here endeth the math lesson for the day.
- Mar 15, 2018
- 1,281
- 5,092
I'm guessing you were at Bliss (you don't need to confirm or deny) but I spent my fair share of time there as well. I personally think El Paso is a beautiful city, a very safe city, and a great place to live. I been all over Texas and I'd chose El Paso over Austin, San Antonio, Dallas/Ft. Worth or Houston 6 days a week and twice on Sunday. I really miss the drives up through the Guadalupe Mountains or doing the polar opposite and heading out to White Sands. People tend to associate it with the violence they hear about across the border in Juarez but that rarely spills over into El Paso. I always said El Paso was the best kept secret in Texas.
I am not sure as I do not know enough about the individuals and their history. However, hearing that MH was an issue with a number of these individuals makes me ask the question whether or not they should have been prohibited by law. The fact of the matter is we only screen for folks who have criminal records and none of the other stuff. Should we be doing a better job at screening. If so, how? And without making it a weapon for others to employ, like red flag laws. I think if we could look at it from a root cause view we could probably come up with some ideas for better (not more) laws and screening. We will never be able to stop illegal gun sales, but we can do better at preventing someone who should not have a gun from going and buying one in the store.
What has come from us bending over and letting the bump stock ban for example, take place? What has come from Californians tolerating the mag restrictions? What has come from letting states in the union pull this red flag crap? You wanna talk mental issues let’s talk about Democrats.. let’s talk about that democratic politician that threatened to take guns if we don’t play nice.. let’s talk about how women and children get ptsd from being in a little fender bender or getting yelled at.. lets talk about the leo’s That get scared and shoot unarmed people.. didn’t they go through some kind of screening?? If we keep bending they will keep pushing till we break or fall over. Not another inch. My rights don’t belong to people like you to give away. I WILL FIGHT for what’s mine. You can join me, oppose me, or get the fuck out of my way. If your gonna just give your rights and guns away without a fight though, send em to someone who will use em.
Similar threads
