Martial Law Makes Gun Prepping Unnecessary! [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Martial Law Makes Gun Prepping Unnecessary!


Made in Austria
04-06-2012, 10:18
If you watch these videos you will soon realize that gun prepping for a SHTF scenario probably doesn't make much sence and is rather a waste of money to invest in guns and ammo.

I always thought that hiding weapons is a very good way to bypass the Martial law, but today I don't think so becasue the government probably knows exactly how many guns you own.

What do you think?

Hurricane Katrina Door to Door Firearms Confiscation - YouTube

Glenn Beck Warns Of Food Riots, Martial Law & Gun Confiscations - YouTube
(go forward to 4:25)




NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina - YouTube


Military Preparing for Martial Law - YouTube

cyrsequipment
04-06-2012, 10:27
:tinfoil:

MadMonkey
04-06-2012, 10:43
Molon Labe?

Made in Austria
04-06-2012, 10:54
Molon Labe?

LOL. No not me. I can't imagine me fighting against a horde of army guys. I'll just hand my gun over.

NecoDude
04-06-2012, 10:55
The things that make you go hummm.... Hummm....

Rodman24
04-06-2012, 11:00
Does anyone remember what happened to the police force during Katrina?

Chesafreak
04-06-2012, 11:00
Maybe the answer is to keep some of your guns ready, and bury others with ammo. Then when the time comes you can retrieve the buried ones.

ArmoryDoc
04-06-2012, 11:11
LOL. No not me. I can't imagine me fighting against a horde of army guys. I'll just hand my gun over.

Yeah. It's a waste of time. I would hand 'em over too. You're right. I mean, what's the point, right ? :yawn:

Bolster
04-06-2012, 11:17
Why do we continue to call this country "United States of America"? That country's gone. We need a new name.

jason10mm
04-06-2012, 11:21
Check your state laws. I thought a bunch of states passed laws preventing gun confiscation in situations like that.

The real issue will be forced evacuation. I'm sure most jurisdictions can forcibly condemn buildings as being "unsafe" and make evacuation mandatory. In this situation your preps are to make sure you can stay OUT of relocation camps. Have the cash and supplies necessary to stay at a hotel or family/friends house and not in a camp like those poor Katrina refugees.

AK_Stick
04-06-2012, 11:31
How does the gov't know exactly how many guns someone has?


Hell, I couldn't even tell you how many I have without counting them all while they're infront of me. Pretty impressive if they could tell me.


Secondly, after all the laws passed making that illegal, I doubt it will happen again.

Hummer
04-06-2012, 11:44
I always thought that hiding weapons is a very good way to bypass the Martial law, but today I don't think so becasue the government probably knows exactly how many guns you own.

What do you think?

We should have no doubt that as a part of the "war on terror", .gov supercomputers are monitoring and compiling data on all of us. Every post and comment you transmit on any listserv, forum, and website from GT to facebook provides another slice of the information pie. Personalities are categorized, people labeled, and potential threats however small are analyzed. If the day ever comes there will be no anonymity and little place to hide.

But, I don't agree that prepping is unnecessary, or that resistance is futile.

Wake_jumper
04-06-2012, 11:48
Check your state laws. I thought a bunch of states passed laws preventing gun confiscation in situations like that.

The real issue will be forced evacuation. I'm sure most jurisdictions can forcibly condemn buildings as being "unsafe" and make evacuation mandatory. In this situation your preps are to make sure you can stay OUT of relocation camps. Have the cash and supplies necessary to stay at a hotel or family/friends house and not in a camp like those poor Katrina refugees.

Under the President's "National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16", State and Local Laws are meaningless.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-garrison/martial-law-under-another_b_1370819.html

oldman11
04-06-2012, 12:18
Hell, if you guys are going to hand over your guns so willingly, then what is the point in having them in the 1st place?

Rodman24
04-06-2012, 12:32
Under the President's "National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16", State and Local Laws are meaningless.[/url]

I would say that in the event of martial law, most police and national guard troops would be busy with the more populated areas, providing security instead beating around in the sticks looking for Joe Bob and his guns. And very few laws would actually matter at that point.

Anyone who thinks that US gun owners will just roll over and allow the confiscation is fooling themselves. Of course I don't own firearms anymore, but I'm just sayin'...

Bolster
04-06-2012, 12:37
Secondly, after all the laws passed making that illegal, I doubt it will happen again.

I assume you are saying this sarcastically?

Made in Austria
04-06-2012, 12:38
How does the gov't know exactly how many guns someone has?


Hell, I couldn't even tell you how many I have without counting them all while they're infront of me. Pretty impressive if they could tell me.


Secondly, after all the laws passed making that illegal, I doubt it will happen again.

Not sure, but they could if they wanted to, if they dont do it already. It's pretty easy her in Nevada because you have to register each firearm except of longarms.

Or they could just count each background check you have had in the past regarding firearm purchases.

AK_Stick
04-06-2012, 12:43
I assume you are saying this sarcastically?



Maybe in your state.


Not in the free ones.

AK_Stick
04-06-2012, 12:47
Not sure, but they could if they wanted to, if they dont do it already. It's pretty easy her in Nevada because you have to register each firearm except of longarms.

Or they could just count each background check you have had in the past regarding firearm purchases.


Number of background checks doesn't mean much. I've bought less than 10 of my guns from FFL's, and only transferred 3-4 through them.


90% of my guns have been purchased from private party's and I've sold several of the transferred ones the same way.

Good luck figuring out how many guns I have, when I can't even give you an exact number without cracking my safe and checking my SN books.

mortpes
04-06-2012, 12:51
Troups = safety? Kent State.

Bren
04-06-2012, 12:52
How does the gov't know exactly how many guns someone has?



They don't know exactly, but if you've bought one since the brady bill was enacted, they have a record that you are a gun owner and a partial list. Yeah, I know they only keep those for a couple of days...right...and that explains why the dealer has to give them the brand, model and serial number of the gun, when that has no legal significance to the background check, too, right?

Yes, they currently have an electronic record, somewhere, of every gun you have bought with a Brady background check, They have a paper and electronic record of every gun you have boght at a gun shop that is no longer in business. In a fairly short time they can have a record of every gun anybody ever bought from any FFL.

Bren
04-06-2012, 12:53
Troups = safety? Kent State.

Exactly - troops or troupes, all I know is they keep us safe from &%&^^% hippies.

Bren
04-06-2012, 12:56
Hell, if you guys are going to hand over your guns so willingly, then what is the point in having them in the 1st place?

You said it. People go on about how the 2nd amendment is about keeping guns to resist the government by force, but from 1775 to today, a very large majority have never had the backbone to do anything about it.

Verrater
04-06-2012, 12:57
snips

You're right, better just hand them over.
I mean what's the worst that could happen?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/May_1944_-_Jews_from_Carpathian_Ruthenia_arrive_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau.jpg/250px-May_1944_-_Jews_from_Carpathian_Ruthenia_arrive_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau.jpg

Edit: Those Katrina confiscations were ruled unconstitutional.
Doesn't mean it won't happen again though.

AK_Stick
04-06-2012, 13:00
They don't know exactly, but if you've bought one since the brady bill was enacted, they have a record that you are a gun owner and a partial list. Yeah, I know they only keep those for a couple of days...right...and that explains why the dealer has to give them the brand, model and serial number of the gun, when that has no legal significance to the background check, too, right?

Yes, they currently have an electronic record, somewhere, of every gun you have bought with a Brady background check, They have a paper and electronic record of every gun you have boght at a gun shop that is no longer in business. In a fairly short time they can have a record of every gun anybody ever bought from any FFL.


Yes, they have a partial list of guns purchased, you "may" own from FFL's.

That in no way shape or form, constitutes any sort of even decent information to make a guestiment of how many guns you ACTUALLY own.

NecoDude
04-06-2012, 14:05
.gov would only have a starting number of guns you'd have, unless you've blown it by posting way too many details of your inventory online. Deny, Deny, Deny, obfuscate, adapt and overcome. We, as a country have allowed the liberals to take us to where we're at today. Me as an individual has allowed it too I guess, but I'm in the minority as in this country it's majority rules. I'm not willing to hand over one damn gun, no matter what.

glockaviator
04-06-2012, 14:10
Was anyone killed by a gun during Katrina other than by the police (Danzinger bridge and others)? Seems like the only ones killed by a gun were killed by the police, though I don't know for sure. Yes there was some looting, some of the looting was done by police as well.

PlasticGuy
04-06-2012, 14:30
How does the gov't know exactly how many guns someone has?


Hell, I couldn't even tell you how many I have without counting them all while they're infront of me. Pretty impressive if they could tell me...
I'm with you, in that even I don't know how many guns I have. I can't imagine the government does either. If they figure it out, can you have them tell me so I can update my insurance? :supergrin:

MoneyMaker
04-06-2012, 14:34
Thats why i buy all mine thru private sales,,,,No ffl or NICS crap here as i dont own a gun

cyrsequipment
04-06-2012, 14:35
Was anyone killed by a gun during Katrina other than by the police (Danzinger bridge and others)? Seems like the only ones killed by a gun were killed by the police, though I don't know for sure. Yes there was some looting, some of the looting was done by police as well.

1 in 5 people (at least) that died during Katrina died from violence. I'm guessing that at least half of them were killed by firearms.

Wake_jumper
04-06-2012, 14:41
You're right, better just hand them over.
I mean what's the worst that could happen?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/May_1944_-_Jews_from_Carpathian_Ruthenia_arrive_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau.jpg/250px-May_1944_-_Jews_from_Carpathian_Ruthenia_arrive_at_Auschwitz-Birkenau.jpg

Edit: Those Katrina confiscations were ruled unconstitutional.
Doesn't mean it won't happen again though.

Martial Law cancels the Constitution.

inzone
04-06-2012, 15:12
dont put all your/eggs in one basket! redundancy is the key to survival. Have some well hidden in a very difficult area of your home to search for or find. Have some ready at hand. have some perhaps cached somewhere, even bury a few with ammo. Have some placed with trusted relatives or friends just to store in a closet for you, etc. door to door gun searches and confiscation throughout the entire nation would be extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible. Even the nazis couldnt find but a fraction of the guns hidden by the French Resistance in WW II. Also, when a lot of those sent to searcvh for and confiscate guns dont come back then the next groups to go out may well just decide to laydog it instead of really search or confront. You can also have some cheap old bolt actions to use as decoys if they come search and you arent inclined to fight it out with them at that moment.....then the armed guerilla resistance starts! The confiscators have to live somewhere, they have to eat, crap, refuel, they have to stop and rest. you go and hunt them to! two can play the search and confiscation game! dont go gentle into that dark night!

arkdweller22
04-06-2012, 15:13
It's pretty easy her in Nevada because you have to register each firearm except of longarms.


Only in Klark county. It's not statewide.
Now, the Brady check can certainly be cross-referenced to get an idea of what you may have.

Made in Austria
04-06-2012, 15:39
dont put all your/eggs in one basket! redundancy is the key to survival. Have some well hidden in a very difficult area of your home to search for or find. Have some ready at hand. have some perhaps cached somewhere, even bury a few with ammo. Have some placed with trusted relatives or friends just to store in a closet for you, etc. door to door gun searches and confiscation throughout the entire nation would be extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible. Even the nazis couldnt find but a fraction of the guns hidden by the French Resistance in WW II. Also, when a lot of those sent to searcvh for and confiscate guns dont come back then the next groups to go out may well just decide to laydog it instead of really search or confront. You can also have some cheap old bolt actions to use as decoys if they come search and you arent inclined to fight it out with them at that moment.....then the armed guerilla resistance starts! The confiscators have to live somewhere, they have to eat, crap, refuel, they have to stop and rest. you go and hunt them to! two can play the search and confiscation game! dont go gentle into that dark night!


Lol. I like the way you think!

G19freak
04-06-2012, 16:31
A rifle behind every blade of grass----just sayin.

Have a feeling quite a few police/mil will take on another line of work when faced with that stark reality-----not to mention being placed in the position of having to fire on their friends, relatives and countrymen---how many will be up for that situation?

How many will be willing to work(and die) for worthless money when there's no one out there paying taxes for their salaries?

Cali-Glock
04-06-2012, 16:38
Martial Law cancels the Constitution.

So some falsely claim. The Constitution says otherwise.

Protus
04-06-2012, 16:51
why stock food, fema has hand out lines.....

as said whats the point.......prep as you can, guns, gear,food, water and all of it...
shtf isnt just about the NWO coming to take your AR15

thesurefire
04-06-2012, 19:50
If you think the .gov is coming for your guns why would you tell them what you plan to do when they implement that plan in a public fashion?

TactiCool
04-06-2012, 20:01
A rifle behind every blade of grass----just sayin.

Have a feeling quite a few police/mil will take on another line of work when faced with that stark reality-----not to mention being placed in the position of having to fire on their friends, relatives and countrymen---how many will be up for that situation?

How many will be willing to work(and die) for worthless money when there's no one out there paying taxes for their salaries?

UN peacekeepers, NATO troops, foreign military, and contractors would have no such moral trouble disarming and killing Americans. IF martial law were ever declared, it would have to be foreign troops doing the dirty work, because, as others have said, there are simply not enough domestic military and police to do the job effectively.

And during Katrina, there were foreign contractors protecting the assets of the ultra wealthy - one company that was employing security in N.O was Isreali I believe. Blackwater, now called Academi, was down there as well. They even went in and began operations one whole week before they got a government contract from FEMA.

JK-linux
04-06-2012, 20:17
.....

Bolster
04-06-2012, 21:02
you go and hunt them to! two can play the search and confiscation game! dont go gentle into that dark night!

All well and good in theory, and in an internet forum, but is that what happened during the Katrina confiscations?

No. People just forked them over. Some got roughed up, and then forked them over. I'm not aware of anyone going to the mat, resisting.

We all talk a good game, but when you're looking down the barrel of your own military that you pay...you saying you'd fight them, rather than hand it over? I think that's just internet wind.

I think the men that would fight are three generations gone, or more.

MadMonkey
04-06-2012, 21:20
LOL. No not me. I can't imagine me fighting against a horde of army guys. I'll just hand my gun over.

Absolutely. Based on the above statement, that would be the best course of action for you.

G22Dude
04-06-2012, 21:28
Logistically it would be impossible for the police/military to do a total gun confiscation in a crisis. In NO they were collecting guns that they saw in plain sight, which was wrong. Having said that I am so disgusted by their actions. I believe if they could get away with it the govt would try it again. But I don't see them working off a list. These guys can't find their butts with both hands. They just aren't that good. Heck if they were they would have executed Fast and Furious and we would not be any wiser. They may get some guns but they wouldn't get all of our guns.

As someone who left federal law enforcement recently, I have a hard time trusting our government because their inclination often runs towards being tyrannical. At the end of the day the government does not trust the people and want to exert control over us. They just don't want us to realize that they are trying to control us. This goes for both parties although the liberals are by far worst with it

UneasyRider
04-06-2012, 21:30
In Florida we have a law against taking your guns away from you during an emergency. If somebody is saying that the government would order us to give them our guns or else... I would give them my shotgun AND my pistol! I think that I have a box of ammo for each of them too.

I don't think that this would ever happen here. Even in a really tough situation politicians want to get elected and there are just to many voters who want to be left alone.

G22Dude
04-06-2012, 21:33
I believe NC had a long standing law about not being able to conceal carry during an emergency. I believe that went down in smoke recently. Can someone correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think Bev Purdue was thrilled about it

vram74
04-06-2012, 21:39
I would hope our Military would disregard any order to disarm citizens. Guess it will depend on how brain washed they are when that time comes. As for me, getting organized with like minded individuals would be job one. Normal every day joes who go to the range on weekends are going to have a hard enough time fighting trained Military. My COD: Fat Ops ass isn't going to play keep away by myself!

domin8ss
04-06-2012, 21:44
Blackwater is not called Academi. Their name is now Z. They're fairly close to where I reside right now, just over the NC/VA line. As for my guns being taken, let them. They'll only get the ones they know about or can find. Good luck on getting all of them. Some places they are hidden are so good that I surprised myself with coming up with that particular location.

Made in Austria
04-06-2012, 21:58
[quote=MadMonkey;18811146]Absolutely. Based on the above statement, that would be the best course of action for you.[/ deleted

kirgi08
04-06-2012, 22:26
I believe NC had a long standing law about not being able to conceal carry during an emergency. I believe that went down in smoke recently. Can someone correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think Bev Purdue was thrilled about it

You are correct,there is a thread on GT about.'08.


ETA: It's in C/Issues. "Federal court strikes down NC emergency gun ban"

yellowhand
04-07-2012, 00:44
Everytime I see or read where so many firearms are sold, based upon the number of times a back ground check is run, I have a question for anyone.
In AZ, if you have a ccw, a background check is never ran when you purchase a firearm.
I suspect this is true everywhere, but not sure.
SO how many ccw holders are out there purchasing firearms and not being factored into the total national count?
Suspect it's a lot.

Javelin
04-07-2012, 00:50
It would be a challenge I'm sure. :supergrin:

Teej
04-07-2012, 00:53
You most certainly can turn over your gun. Heck, sell them all now and you won't have to worry about it. History does have a way of repeating itself.....

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/lexington.htm

The British marched on Lexington [on its way to Concord] to confiscate "illegal weapons" from citizens and from what we would today refer to as an Armory. OurConstitution was drafted 15 months I believe after this event. Thank God for those "rebels...", err I mean "terrorists....", I mean PATRIOTS!!

The minutemen were really a mostly a bunch of farmers. In Lexington there were only about 40 minutemen assembled facing 700 British. The British sent them fleeing and they all ran off with their weapons. Marching on to Concord the British encounted more armed American citizens defending the bridge into Concord. Thinking this wasn't going to be easy the British turned and went back to Boston.

All along the way back to Boston the Americans sniped at the British till an estimated 250 British troops were killed AND they didn't get the weapons. Like I stated, I think it was 15 months later that our current constitution was drafted.

They would have to declare martial law across entire regions and I still do not see it working. But you most certainly can hand over your firearms.

Syclone538
04-07-2012, 01:31
Why do we continue to call this country "United States of America"? That country's gone. We need a new name.

Not The United States, but These United States.


All well and good in theory, and in an internet forum, but is that what happened during the Katrina confiscations?

No. People just forked them over. Some got roughed up, and then forked them over. I'm not aware of anyone going to the mat, resisting.

We all talk a good game, but when you're looking down the barrel of your own military that you pay...you saying you'd fight them, rather than hand it over? I think that's just internet wind.

I think the men that would fight are three generations gone, or more.

If anyone did, I doubt we would ever find out.

If everyone resisted confiscation with force, the attempted confiscation would end very quickly, but that doesn't make it any easier for the first people up.

AK_Stick
04-07-2012, 02:12
So some falsely claim. The Constitution says otherwise.

Where does it say that? I've never seen anything in the constitution that claims it supersedes martial law.

UN peacekeepers, NATO troops, foreign military, and contractors would have no such moral trouble disarming and killing Americans. IF martial law were ever declared, it would have to be foreign troops doing the dirty work, because, as others have said, there are simply not enough domestic military and police to do the job effectively.

And during Katrina, there were foreign contractors protecting the assets of the ultra wealthy - one company that was employing security in N.O was Isreali I believe. Blackwater, now called Academi, was down there as well. They even went in and began operations one whole week before they got a government contract from FEMA.

Nato/UN/foreign military would have way more trouble than any US military force would ever have disarming US civilians.

Its harder to shoot a countryman and brother than an invading force.

While people may grumble and be upset about handing over guns to the military/police ala Katrina, a oh say Frenchmen or Italian is much more likely to get shot in the face.

9mm +p+
04-07-2012, 02:25
LOL. No not me. I can't imagine me fighting against a horde of army guys. I'll just hand my gun over.

That kind of says it all, no? The key to avoiding this kind of BS and that is exactly what it is, is to not be where you are expected. In other words be gone before to police show up. Nationwide martial law is a total joke, where is the manpower to enforce it EVERYWHERE coming from???

Bren
04-07-2012, 05:05
Yes, they have a partial list of guns purchased, you "may" own from FFL's.

That in no way shape or form, constitutes any sort of even decent information to make a guestiment of how many guns you ACTUALLY own.

No, but it suppoorts your place on the "houses to search" list.

Heck, we had a case here, that I only know about because the inmate sued us over his parole revocation, where a parolee's wife, all alone, went to a gun shop and bought a gun. The next day, ATF was in the parole officer's office wanting to search the guy's house. So much for those background checks that aren't being used for that purpose or communictaed to other agencies. I still don't know how they knew she was a parolee's wife. (BTW, guy was found not guilty in federal court, but had his parole revoked anyhow)

expatman
04-07-2012, 05:40
UN peacekeepers, NATO troops, foreign military, and contractors would have no such moral trouble disarming and killing Americans. IF martial law were ever declared, it would have to be foreign troops doing the dirty work, because, as others have said, there are simply not enough domestic military and police to do the job effectively.

And during Katrina, there were foreign contractors protecting the assets of the ultra wealthy - one company that was employing security in N.O was Isreali I believe. Blackwater, now called Academi, was down there as well. They even went in and began operations one whole week before they got a government contract from FEMA.

Please have the decency to not sweep with such a broad brush. As a contractor I would never do what you say I have no moral trouble doing. We are not all one living entity. We are individuals. I am so tired of contractors being wrapped up in such a bad light as if we are all of one mind.

expatman
04-07-2012, 05:44
Blackwater is not called Academi. Their name is now Z. They're fairly close to where I reside right now, just over the NC/VA line. As for my guns being taken, let them. They'll only get the ones they know about or can find. Good luck on getting all of them. Some places they are hidden are so good that I surprised myself with coming up with that particular location.

You are incorrect friend. Their name is not Z. It is now Academi. It was Xe (pronounced Z) But has been changed.

The company has been broken up a bit. I believe the training side is still called Blackwater U.S. Training Center, and there may or may not still be a Blackwater Air. There is /was a Greystone who did some security work but the remaining bulk of the security side as far as I know is Academi.

TN.Frank
04-07-2012, 07:59
Handguns, lots and lots of handguns. Easy to hide either on your person or in a hole covered by dirt. Can be used for defense or offense to obtain other guns. Handguns are the answer.

QNman
04-07-2012, 08:24
So some falsely claim. The Constitution says otherwise.

So the people who would ignore the COTUS by confiscating firearms, such as post-Katrina, would be inclined to care whether or not the COTUS was being violated?

The COTUS requires those in charge respect it for it to be effective.

brisk21
04-07-2012, 08:34
Good reason to not live in a large city. I don't see gun confiscation happening in small towns as easily as large citys. Especially "Naorlans". Our "leaders" ie Sheriff, Mayor, ect.. know they don't need to disarm their citizens. We are all on the same side.

vram74
04-07-2012, 09:07
It'll probably go this way:

1. POTUS will get on national TV and announce a mandate that everyone must show up to collection stations and surrender their firearms by such and such dates or face charges. There will probably be sheeple treats given out at those sites to encourage participation.

2. After the collection sites close. there will be public service messages on all forms of media portraying firearms as evil and anyone suspected of owning one should be reported. Rewards will be given to those that rat out their neighbors. Collection sites will reopen occasionally offering amnesty to those who decide to turn them in.

3. Random door to door searches will be conducted via joint ops by police/national guard.

There will be alot of people that willingly hand them over and there will be small bloodbaths here and there. To the Gov and gun grabbers it won't be about getting them all at once, they're happy with getting them outlawed and taking chunks of them at a time till they get them all.

Stevekozak
04-07-2012, 09:20
It'll probably go this way:

1. POTUS will get on national TV and announce a mandate that everyone must show up to collection stations and surrender their firearms by such and such dates or face charges. There will probably be sheeple treats given out at those sites to encourage participation.

2. After the collection sites close. there will be public service messages on all forms of media portraying firearms as evil and anyone suspected of owning one should be reported. Rewards will be given to those that rat out their neighbors. Collection sites will reopen occasionally offering amnesty to those who decide to turn them in.

3. Random door to door searches will be conducted via joint ops by police/national guard.

There will be alot of people that willingly hand them over and there will be small bloodbaths here and there. To the Gov and gun grabbers it won't be about getting them all at once, they're happy with getting them outlawed and taking chunks of them at a time till they get them all.

This seems like a likely scenario to me. They will play the public against the public. They'll make it all seem reasonable and logical, and enough ppl will go along with it to make it too late. Alas, Babylon!

Made in Austria
04-07-2012, 10:57
That kind of says it all, no? The key to avoiding this kind of BS and that is exactly what it is, is to not be where you are expected. In other words be gone before to police show up. Nationwide martial law is a total joke, where is the manpower to enforce it EVERYWHERE coming from???

Yes it does. The reason I said this is because I am no internet Rambo. No individual in it's right mind will start a gun fight against a highly trained horde of military personal, ala' Molon Labe. I mean that would be stupid because you will get killed, period. And who is gonna take care of your loved ones when you are gone, huh? No one because you got killed because of a foolish mistake. I hand my gun over and I still will be armed. If they come and knock on your door, make them happy so that they move on. All you need is brains my friends.

Stevekozak
04-07-2012, 11:18
Yes it does. The reason I said this is because I am no internet Rambo. No individual in it's right mind will start a gun fight against a highly trained horde of military personal, ala' Molon Labe. I mean that would be stupid because you will get killed, period. And who is gonna take care of your loved ones when you are gone, huh? No one because you got killed because of a foolish mistake. I hand my gun over and I still will be armed. If they come and knock on your door, make them happy so that they move on. All you need is brains my friends.
I think 6 million plus Jews died about 70+ years ago with this kind of thinking....

MadMonkey
04-07-2012, 11:35
Please have the decency to not sweep with such a broad brush. As a contractor I would never do what you say I have no moral trouble doing. We are not all one living entity. We are individuals. I am so tired of contractors being wrapped up in such a bad light as if we are all of one mind.

Agreed.

DScottHewitt
04-07-2012, 11:51
I'll just hand my gun over.

Did it hurt, or did the doctor numb you up down there first?

TactiCool
04-07-2012, 12:06
Please have the decency to not sweep with such a broad brush. As a contractor I would never do what you say I have no moral trouble doing. We are not all one living entity. We are individuals. I am so tired of contractors being wrapped up in such a bad light as if we are all of one mind.

If you caught the jist of my post, I was referring to the multitudes of FOREIGN contractors that operate throughout the various conflict areas of the world. My supposition was that a combined amount of contractors and foreign military would be able to enforce martial law, at least to some extent. I'm not sure how much simpler I could have made it.

expatman
04-07-2012, 12:21
The jist of my response was to suggest that you would NOT have as easy a time as you may think finding civilian contractors to do the dirty work of the govt. At least when it comes to subverting the COTUS.

Bolster
04-07-2012, 12:50
I think 6 million plus Jews died about 70+ years ago with this kind of thinking....

I'd submit that's the exact thinking of most American gun owners today. Easy to talk tough on the internet, but I can virtually guarantee the vast majority of gun owners would not die to keep their guns...when they were faced with that actual choice. It's a pleasant fantasy, but soft modern Americans are not hard ancient Spartans. Oh sure, you'll boetch and moan and vote, but you won't actually resist.

I'm a little irritated everybody jumping down Austria's throat, just because he's being honest. I don't believe the critics would really choose death before disarmament.

So far, there has been no sufficiently large groundswell of resistance to bigger and bigger government, to be truly effective. It's been bred out of us. Open your eyes...the most audacious big government meddler ever is confident he'll be re-elected in a walk. He's sitting on a massive pot of money to run a fabulous propaganda machine. He's as much said he's waiting for re-election before pursuing his REAL agenda, at which point he's invulnerable. So don't be shocked if you bitter clingers are told to hand them over soon. And...you very likely will.

TactiCool
04-07-2012, 12:51
The jist of my response was to suggest that you would NOT have as easy a time as you may think finding civilian contractors to do the dirty work of the govt. At least when it comes to subverting the COTUS.

Perhaps I should elaborate on my opinion a little. Think about it: every president since H. Bush has, at one time or another, claimed that they derive their authority from the UN. Now, does it seem so far-fetched that the UN could pass a resolution that would allow for extensive 'peacekeeping' efforts in countries that have been affected by calamities like economic collapse, wide spread pandemics, etc.? If UN members each donated men and supplies, along with coordination with the U.S. government, I do believe that a very substantial force could be created.

Not once did I ever say it would be easy. But judging by the way that I have seen people react to foreign contractors, I think that any coordinated resistance, at least in urban areas, would be very limited. Besides, it would not be prudent, at least at first, to take over rural areas. Only key infrastructure would need to be seized for our hypothetical 'victory' to take place.

expatman
04-07-2012, 13:01
To be realistic, I don't think there are too many countries with enough "competent" people to fill the ranks of any so called contractor force. The field is predominantly staffed by countries such as the U.S., U.K., S. Africa, Australia, and maybe a few French here and there. All the other countries that I have seen with any kind of armed contracting force are far inferior to anything you and I are used to. They simply would not be very formidable IMO.

Not to mention that the U.N. can hardly find its ass with both of its hands let alone coordinate a force which you are alluding to. My opinion of course.

TactiCool
04-07-2012, 13:21
To be realistic, I don't think there are too many countries with enough "competent" people to fill the ranks of any so called contractor force. The field is predominantly staffed by countries such as the U.S., U.K., S. Africa, Australia, and maybe a few French here and there. All the other countries that I have seen with any kind of armed contracting force are far inferior to anything you and I are used to. They simply would not be very formidable IMO.

Not to mention that the U.N. can hardly find its ass with both of its hands let alone coordinate a force which you are alluding to. My opinion of course.

I agree with you. Thing is, I have seen how our citizens react to foreign contractors, and let me tell you, they became terrified. After Katrina, there was a certain group of Isreali security guys (I think they were called ISI?) operating in one of the wealthier suburbs of N.O and the locals were practically crapping their pants!

bdcremer
04-07-2012, 13:28
Georgia passed a law against firearms confiscation in the event of a Katrina like incident. Doesn't mean LEO and military won't violate your rights, but it is better than nothing.

inzone
04-07-2012, 13:45
the 80/20 rule, or maybe the 90/10 rule! Yes most gun owners will cave in, but its the 10% that will be a big problem for the jackbooted thugs! Not very many guns were actually seized in new orleans and I think a lot of the smarter prepper/patriot types had enough brains to leave when advised to do so. Look at the French Resistance in WW II. The French aren't known for being particularly warlike, but enough of them fought back using guerilla warfare to be a real problem for the Nazis. I really dont think the farmers at Lexington and Concord were super warlike either, but enough of them mustered out to fight. Approx. 90 million gun owners in U.S. 10 % equals nine million, even 5% equals 4.5 million if my math is right. 4.5 million armed guerilla fighters who know the terrain, know the locals and know hit and run and shoot and scoot, molotov cocktails, ersatz weapons, including the fertilizer and the ahem, other stuff. Bolster, I respectfully disagree.

kirgi08
04-07-2012, 13:59
the 80/20 rule, or maybe the 90/10 rule! Yes most gun owners will cave in, but its the 10% that will be a big problem for the jackbooted thugs! Not very many guns were actually seized in new orleans and I think a lot of the smarter prepper/patriot types had enough brains to leave when advised to do so. Look at the French Resistance in WW II. The French aren't known for being particularly warlike, but enough of them fought back using guerilla warfare to be a real problem for the Nazis. I really dont think the farmers at Lexington and Concord were super warlike either, but enough of them mustered out to fight. Approx. 90 million gun owners in U.S. 10 % equals nine million, even 5% equals 4.5 million if my math is right. 4.5 million armed guerilla fighters who know the terrain, know the locals and know hit and run and shoot and scoot, molotov cocktails, ersatz weapons, including the fertilizer and the ahem, other stuff. Bolster, I respectfully disagree.

:goodpost: :agree:

It'd be ironic if a real "Red Dawn" happened in the US.'08.

Bolster
04-07-2012, 14:06
Bolster, I respectfully disagree.

That's cool, and I hope you're right. But it seems to me the flaw in taking historical precedent, is that todays' average American is a castrati in comparison to our ancestors of only a few generations ago. You point to what might happen with a small minority, I point to what has happened with the majority.

You have to have sufficient resolve and numbers to resist the constant erosion of freedom. Today's American citizen isn't much into resisting anything except, perhaps, higher cable TV fees, or more expensive beer. Sure, we have hope from the likes of the tea party, but they can be pulverized into submission almost at will by the government/media/academic complex, which has built a propaganda machine of the likes we've never seen before.

If you want to watch it in action, watch how BO will be made to seem a successful president.

It's the old frog-in-the-pot analogy. The point of hopping out was maybe 20 or 30 years ago.

OK, I'm a little depressed about this topic, and I really hope I'm wrong.

owl6roll
04-07-2012, 20:58
I guess that's where we find out who believes the CONSTITUTION is worth the paper it's written on, and TAKES a STAND, or who goes quietly into the night and is loaded onto cattle transports and driven away and never seen again.

Sheep and sheep dogs...

domin8ss
04-07-2012, 21:31
You are incorrect friend. Their name is not Z. It is now Academi. It was Xe (pronounced Z) But has been changed.

The company has been broken up a bit. I believe the training side is still called Blackwater U.S. Training Center, and there may or may not still be a Blackwater Air. There is /was a Greystone who did some security work but the remaining bulk of the security side as far as I know is Academi.

Looks like I need to crawl out from whatever rock I'm under. They're such a big employer out here that you'd assume I would have heard something, especially since I'm so close to JFCOM. It's very possible something happened while I wasn't watching.

Javelin
04-07-2012, 21:49
I guess that's where we find out who believes the CONSTITUTION is worth the paper it's written on, and TAKES a STAND, or who goes quietly into the night and is loaded onto cattle transports and driven away and never seen again.

Sheep and sheep dogs...

:agree:

UneasyRider
04-07-2012, 22:18
I know that we all live in different parts of the country where people think in unique ways about the same issues. Where I live there are a lot of people who just would not put up with a martial law gun grab and you would not want to have to deal with them. I have relatives in states where people generally consider guns the "problem".

I guess it's all about perspective.

G22Dude
04-07-2012, 22:36
I know that we all live in different parts of the country where people think in unique ways about the same issues. Where I live there are a lot of people who just would not put up with a martial law gun grab and you would not want to have to deal with them. I have relatives in states where people generally consider guns the "problem".

I guess it's all about perspective.

You are spot on regarding perspective. In NO, and other left leaning cities that already had high crime it was easy for police commissioners to make the gun the enemy. The gun was already the enemy when thugs were shooting each other with illegally obtained firearms. I bet this crap would never fly in most other parishes in the state. Especially the more rural areas

lawman800
04-08-2012, 01:36
So the people who would ignore the COTUS by confiscating firearms, such as post-Katrina, would be inclined to care whether or not the COTUS was being violated?

The COTUS requires those in charge respect it for it to be effective.

I don't think it says anywhere one way or another but in times of need when the President declares Martial Law, he can suspend the protections of the Constitution.

Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus during his administration and that is a guarantee under the Constitution.

What would prevent other parts of the Constitution, or the entire Constitution, from being suspended?

Heck, enough people believe Obama will declare martial law just to prevent an election so that he can continue his presidency, right? How hard is it to cook up a national incident to declare martial law?

We fought the a few wars over made up or hyped up incidents, including the Gulf of Tonkin, no?

UneasyRider
04-08-2012, 07:46
You are spot on regarding perspective. In NO, and other left leaning cities that already had high crime it was easy for police commissioners to make the gun the enemy. The gun was already the enemy when thugs were shooting each other with illegally obtained firearms. I bet this crap would never fly in most other parishes in the state. Especially the more rural areas

That sounds true to me. In my area most people are well armed and proud of it. If you are the guy who does not own a gun that's perfectly ok but "they" find themselves appologizing for not wanting to own one. It's just the opposite of TV or a northeastern state for example where the gun owner is usually appologizing for his feelings of needing the gun.

QNman
04-08-2012, 08:07
I don't think it says anywhere one way or another but in times of need when the President declares Martial Law, he can suspend the protections of the Constitution.

Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus during his administration and that is a guarantee under the Constitution.

What would prevent other parts of the Constitution, or the entire Constitution, from being suspended?

Heck, enough people believe Obama will declare martial law just to prevent an election so that he can continue his presidency, right? How hard is it to cook up a national incident to declare martial law?

We fought the a few wars over made up or hyped up incidents, including the Gulf of Tonkin, no?

That was what I was driving at exactly. :thumbsup:

Teej
04-08-2012, 12:52
Well most of these have addressed individual citizens response to martial law.

What if a state or two or more stood up against such an event???

kirgi08
04-08-2012, 13:42
Then,It would turn out ta be another war against the north.If you go by most states gun laws the north is far more restrictive.So the south wants our 2A rights the north is more than willing ta ignore/destroy the COTUS.'08.

QNman
04-08-2012, 18:59
Then,It would turn out ta be another war against the north.If you go by most states gun laws the north is far more restrictive.So the south wants our 2A rights the north is more than willing ta ignore/destroy the COTUS.'08.

Then I'd be moving back home to Texas.

RedHaze
04-08-2012, 20:53
The 'bible of the racist right' isn't exactly politically correct, in any sense of the word.

But those fella's sure know their cache's and get things done.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/38/Turnerdiariescover.jpg

UneasyRider
04-08-2012, 21:03
Then,It would turn out ta be another war against the north.If you go by most states gun laws the north is far more restrictive.So the south wants our 2A rights the north is more than willing ta ignore/destroy the COTUS.'08.

Two thirds of the military are from red states.
Some of the best military bases are in the red states.
Most of people with guns and ammunition are in the red states.
We are in a debt scenario that we can NOT win in any possible way.
Nobody in Washington D.C. is doing anything to fix the problems that they could fix.

I think that a civil war would not happen but with the right leadership in the southeast for example, you could find states wanting to leave the union and form their own "confederacy?" again. This time they would be to well armed (nukes and stuff) for there to be any kind of shooting war so it is completely possible.

If you look at the food and industry that has resides in the south or the west too it would be sustainable. The northeast could never sustain itself and frankly with all of those little states having two senators it no longer makes any sense, we are now ruled by the federal government instead of served by them.

Every passing year I am glad that I am that much closer to not having to be involved, that it will be somebody elses problem, but in all honesty I think that we are all going to catch it in the butt pretty soon and without much if any warning either.

lawman800
04-09-2012, 00:01
Simply put... the conservatives can break off and form their own state and the liberals can have their own state. No trade between the two, we just do our own thing.

Let's see how long it takes for the liberals to die off from all the leeches in their ranks while we have the productive citizenry.

Really, they want socialism so bad and they want to redistribute wealth and take from the producers and give to the non-productive, then they can do it to themselves.

What does a producer even get from a recipient? Nothing.

We would be just fine without liberals. They would not survive without us.

TangoFoxtrot
04-09-2012, 04:35
Martial law is one of the reasons to have guns on hand!

TangoFoxtrot
04-09-2012, 04:38
Simply put... the conservatives can break off and form their own state and the liberals can have their own state. No trade between the two, we just do our own thing.

Let's see how long it takes for the liberals to die off from all the leeches in their ranks while we have the productive citizenry.

Really, they want socialism so bad and they want to redistribute wealth and take from the producers and give to the non-productive, then they can do it to themselves.

What does a producer even get from a recipient? Nothing.

We would be just fine without liberals. They would not survive without us.


Don't be so sure about your statement. Political views has nothing to do about survival of the fittest. Over confidence gets you killed fast! Don't under estimate anyone! If they need or want your stuff bad enough they will try to take it! Your pro Republican attitude won't help you.

racerford
04-09-2012, 07:58
Don't be so sure about your statement. Political views has nothing to do about survival of the fittest. Over confidence gets you killed fast! Don't under estimate anyone! If they need or want your stuff bad enough they will try to take it! Your pro Republican attitude won't help you.

He did not use the word Republican in that post. He used the word conservative. You may not have noticed, but the two are not the same.

If the takers in our country (government subsidized) can survive without the subsidy of the those that pay the bulk of the taxes, then we should stop the subsidies and and let them. Deficit spending solved.

lawman800
04-09-2012, 09:07
He did not use the word Republican in that post. He used the word conservative. You may not have noticed, but the two are not the same.

If the takers in our country (government subsidized) can survive without the subsidy of the those that pay the bulk of the taxes, then we should stop the subsidies and and let them. Deficit spending solved.

Exactly. Substitute the words "self-sufficient" and "big government nanny state" for "conservative" and "liberal" respectively.

Conservative is a state of mind and not living in a way that makes you need others. Sure, things happen but when help is given to others, it's done out of charity, not because the government took it from you by force to give to others.

Look at any liberal (aka progressive, aka socialist) state around the world. How well are they doing as a society? They all succumb to capitalism or live off other country's subsidies. Even the almight North Korean government lives off subsidies but yet, displays that defiant entitlement attitude like they can do whatever they want while taking from others.

No. You take care of your own first. We don't owe you jack.

Bolster
04-09-2012, 10:41
Simply put... the conservatives can break off and form their own state and the liberals can have their own state.

The lib state would be an odd bicoastal affair. They'd take the North East (as far west as Minnesota) as well as Cali/Oregon/Wash. They'd need a very long bridge to connect.

Political views has nothing to do about survival of the fittest.

Not sure I agree with that statement at all. Political views have a great deal to do with one's survival. You could argue that different political views are different sorts of survival strategies. I think the political views that most closely match reality, ultimately win.

Glocksanity
04-09-2012, 13:02
The Katrina gun grabbers only went after individuals.

When they approached groups of armed men, a citizen militia if you will, they kept on going.

They are bullies. When met with force, the gun grabbers will move on.

wjv
04-09-2012, 14:04
why stock food, fema has hand out lines.....

as said whats the point.......prep as you can, guns, gear,food, water and all of it...
shtf isnt just about the NWO coming to take your AR15

Two choices. .

1) Prep

OR

2) http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i303/bcvojak/RVNet3/BareShelves.jpg

3) http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i303/bcvojak/RVNet3/Queue01.jpg

G22Dude
04-09-2012, 15:52
I've told my wife repeatedly that I refuse to join FEMA food and water lines. Now that we have a some my rersolve to aoid this is firmer

DrSticky
04-09-2012, 16:25
"I, STATE YOUR NAME, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, STATE YOUR NAME, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of 2LT do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

or for the Guard.

"I, STATE YOUR NAME, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of TEXAS against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of TEXAS and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God. "


In the oath of enlistment, the Constitution is first for a reason. Right now, many officers won't give the command. Most Enlisted wouldn't follow it. The military is operating in countries where it is legal for the locals to have firearms. We don't confiscate there without good reason.

owl6roll
04-09-2012, 17:05
If it were to come to something like that, I don't think there would any of out troops, BLUE HELMETS, then it would be on!

Angel
04-09-2012, 18:00
Don't count out our ex military who will not cave if the feds tried to sieze firearms. I love my family, my country and what is right more than i love my life. I , my wife and kids all know heaven is our home. We all die sometime. I would rather die fighting and get there sooner than surrender and live in shame. Saying that, I hope it doesn't come to that.

Angel

G22Dude
04-09-2012, 18:21
"I, STATE YOUR NAME, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, STATE YOUR NAME, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of 2LT do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

or for the Guard.

"I, STATE YOUR NAME, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of TEXAS against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of TEXAS and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God. "


In the oath of enlistment, the Constitution is first for a reason. Right now, many officers won't give the command. Most Enlisted wouldn't follow it. The military is operating in countries where it is legal for the locals to have firearms. We don't confiscate there without good reason.

I don't disagree with anything you've stated, but how do you explain New Orleans during Katrina

Glocksanity
04-09-2012, 18:36
I don't disagree with anything you've stated, but how do you explain New Orleans during Katrina

I think the guys that confiscated the guns were bullies with a hard on for power. When they were confronted with a bunch of grown men, all armed, they backed down.

Some guys with badges like to abuse power. No way around that. A few bad apples in every business/industry/platoon/whatever. Hopefully, they are the exception and not the rule.

Glocksanity
04-09-2012, 19:05
the 80/20 rule, or maybe the 90/10 rule! Yes most gun owners will cave in, but its the 10% that will be a big problem for the jackbooted thugs! Not very many guns were actually seized in new orleans and I think a lot of the smarter prepper/patriot types had enough brains to leave when advised to do so. Look at the French Resistance in WW II. The French aren't known for being particularly warlike, but enough of them fought back using guerilla warfare to be a real problem for the Nazis. I really dont think the farmers at Lexington and Concord were super warlike either, but enough of them mustered out to fight. Approx. 90 million gun owners in U.S. 10 % equals nine million, even 5% equals 4.5 million if my math is right. 4.5 million armed guerilla fighters who know the terrain, know the locals and know hit and run and shoot and scoot, molotov cocktails, ersatz weapons, including the fertilizer and the ahem, other stuff. Bolster, I respectfully disagree.

Heck, maybe that rule applies to the military/leo's that will try and confiscate.

Hopefully it is the 80% that don't and the 20% that try.

Teej
04-09-2012, 19:34
I think the guys that confiscated the guns were bullies with a hard on for power. When they were confronted with a bunch of grown men, all armed, they backed down.


Are you saying that there was a group of armed men that confronted the gun confiscators? If so, I sure missed that story. If there was, can you find a printed account of it and PM me the link. [i don't want to hi jack this thread]

thank you

Teej
04-09-2012, 19:40
Something like this might very well happen

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/tnrevolt.shtml

http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?action=printpage;topic=969.0

http://lonestarwatchdog.blogspot.com/2012/01/battle-of-athens-was-about-election.html

G22Dude
04-09-2012, 21:44
I think the guys that confiscated the guns were bullies with a hard on for power. When they were confronted with a bunch of grown men, all armed, they backed down.

Some guys with badges like to abuse power. No way around that. A few bad apples in every business/industry/platoon/whatever. Hopefully, they are the exception and not the rule.

I could have sworn these guys were acting at the behest of the NO police chief.

survive1999
04-09-2012, 23:35
I guess I have nothing to worry about because all my guns went overboard in that boating accident......

TangoFoxtrot
04-10-2012, 04:31
The lib state would be an odd bicoastal affair. They'd take the North East (as far west as Minnesota) as well as Cali/Oregon/Wash. They'd need a very long bridge to connect.



Not sure I agree with that statement at all. Political views have a great deal to do with one's survival. You could argue that different political views are different sorts of survival strategies. I think the political views that most closely match reality, ultimately win.

Well when the SHTF and people are hunting down food, I don't think they are going to be wondering if their prey is a republican or Democtrat. They are just wanting food and water.

lawman800
04-10-2012, 08:51
I guess I have nothing to worry about because all my guns went overboard in that boating accident......

Me too... and I didn't even go boating!

wildcat455
04-10-2012, 13:33
Well when the SHTF and people are hunting down food, I don't think they are going to be wondering if their prey is a republican or Democtrat. They are just wanting food and water.

I think you may be missing his point... or an even bigger piece of the puzzle.

jp3975
04-11-2012, 01:58
Well when the SHTF and people are hunting down food, I don't think they are going to be wondering if their prey is a republican or Democtrat. They are just wanting food and water.

I'll use the tv show, Preppers to illustrate the point.

There was a liberal couple who had a very impressive setup...and even some hippie neighbors to help out. Sort of a commune.

At the end of the show they always come up with some sort of weakness...an area the people can improve upon.

You can guess that theirs was they had no guns.

They felt that it was unethical to have them and believed their community[also without guns] would be enough to protect them.

One hippie looking neighbor said it was stupid to have guns. That if someone came up...he would share what they had. And he'd see what kind of people they where. If he felt they would be a help to them, they could stay...if he felt they would give him trouble, he'd poison them or cut their throats in their sleep.:rofl:

No one with guns would be able to harm them. No one would take advantage of their vulnerability even though the whole country knows theyre unarmed and have mass amounts of supplies. No well armed group would take their things, kill their men, and rape their women. That could never happen.

TangoFoxtrot
04-11-2012, 04:27
jp3975 I get what your saying but in the example you gave, you see those hippies as "libral' or "bleeding heart librals" I see them as just plain STUPID, NIEVE, and my next sourse of supplies if I were a thug searching for prey in a SHTF senario.

Stevekozak
04-11-2012, 05:01
jp3975 I get what your saying but in the example you gave, you see those hippies as "libral' or "bleeding heart librals" I see them as just plain STUPID, NIEVE, and my next sourse of supplies if I were a thug searching for prey in a SHTF senario.
I am pretty sure they were liberals. The lady made a point of pointing out that they did not fit into the typical prepper community because they were not conservative and did not like guns. She also responded to the criticism about not being able to protect their preps rather smugly saying that if SHTF we would see who fared better them or the preppers with guns. I think we all know the answers to that one. My actual guess is that she was lying and does have a few guns stashed away. I did envy their bee setup.

lawman800
04-11-2012, 08:14
One hippie looking neighbor said it was stupid to have guns. That if someone came up...he would share what they had. And he'd see what kind of people they where. If he felt they would be a help to them, they could stay...if he felt they would give him trouble, he'd poison them or cut their throats in their sleep.:rofl:

Right... assuming the armed group did not just come in and take over and tie everyone up or kill the majority of them from the get go. Cutting throats in sleep is so so much more civilized than shooting... yeah... typical liberal disconnect with reality and hypocrisy of unbelievable proportions.:faint:

No one with guns would be able to harm them. No one would take advantage of their vulnerability even though the whole country knows theyre unarmed and have mass amounts of supplies. No well armed group would take their things, kill their men, and rape their women. That could never happen.

If they were really the typical liberal hippie commune types, the women probably smell and are unattractive enough that the armed group would be more likely to kill the women and rape the men....:whistling:

Share THIS!

http://www.mostphotos.com/preview/933166/senior-hippie-lady-smoking.jpg

G22Dude
04-11-2012, 08:26
Right... assuming the armed group did not just come in and take over and tie everyone up or kill the majority of them from the get go. Cutting throats in sleep is so so much more civilized than shooting... yeah... typical liberal disconnect with reality and hypocrisy of unbelievable proportions.:faint:



If they were really the typical liberal hippie commune types, the women probably smell and are unattractive enough that the armed group would be more likely to kill the women and rape the men....:whistling:

Share THIS!



This reminds me of the folks who would rather take a baseball bat to a home invader than use a gun. Do I really want to go hand to hand, and be in breath smelling distance with an opponent as opposed to being able to take you out at distance with a firearm. Ignorance and niavete is so rich:rofl::rofl::rofl:

jason10mm
04-11-2012, 08:38
My actual guess is that she was lying and does have a few guns stashed away. I did envy their bee setup.

I agree, that couple were, by FAR, the smartest folks on that show. They revealed nothing critical, engaged in the least amount of *********gery and staging for the camera, and were well adjusted (notice how clean their yard was, compared to the ramshackle mess of the others?) for society.

Compare them to just about every one else on that show, like the lady with uncontrolled OCD taping soup packets to every door, and it becomes pretty clear that the bee couple are not only the real deal but are way smarter than the shows producers and didn't fall for their tricks.

MoneyMaker
04-11-2012, 11:30
well nothing will happen so i dont know why you all discuss it

Donn57
04-11-2012, 11:33
The lib state would be an odd bicoastal affair. They'd take the North East (as far west as Minnesota) as well as Cali/Oregon/Wash. They'd need a very long bridge to connect.

Why would they need to connect? Currently, Alaska is separated from the rest of the U.S. by Canada and Hawaii by a large chunk of the Pacific Ocean. For that matter, I think you could add Hawaii to the lib state list as well.

Glocksanity
04-11-2012, 16:16
I could have sworn these guys were acting at the behest of the NO police chief.

It doesn't matter at who's behest they were acting. Tackling an old woman and confiscating her gun and pulling her from here home were all the workings of bullies.