Feinstein's Gun Control Bill Will Trigger The Next American Revolution

Zero Hedge ^ | December 28, 2012 | Brandon Smith

[Errant]

...Revolution? Yes, it all sounds rather “extreme”, but the cold hard reality of our era is not going to comfort us with diplomacies and niceties, so honestly, why should I have to sugar coat anything? We live in extreme times and there is no longer room for prancing around the ultimate consequences of that which is taking place in America today. This country is increasingly sliding towards the edge of internal conflict. The Liberty Movement and true Constitutionalists see it, subsections of Republicans and Democrats see it, and most of all, the federal government sees it. In fact, they may even be counting on it...

[Las Vegas Ron]

What is the meaning of the words "The right of the people to keep and bear arms"? What is the clear reading of those words?

It is what it is, the Founding Fathers mad it quite clear what it meant in the Federalist Papers.

In terms of property rights vs Snd Amendment rights of another, in my view it's a no brainer. The peopery owner may very well prohibit you from bearing arms on his property, that is his right. You don't have to enter nor do you have a right to enter without his permission.

Now let's get government involved:

Argggggg, nooooo!!! LOL!

Seriously, as you wrote, the 2nd A acknowledges a right, it doesn't give it, so how can it be infringed by Government and still be within the constraints of the Constitution?

In my view, it can't.

People who would say you can only bear arms on your own property are simply incorrect, when viewed by the intent of the founders.

The right to keep and bear arms is straight forward as can be until you get some intellectuals involed who try and muddy it up....for their agenda.

[antisocial]

bookmark

[Noumenon]

Calling Mr. Turner!

Calling Mr. Bowman!

[Noumenon]

Well, it has the ring of truth, given what we know of the monsters in the White House. If even part of it is true, we’re in for a world of hurt.

[KrisKrinkle]

It is what it is, the Founding Fathers mad it quite clear what it meant in the Federalist Papers.

OK, so "it is what it is", but that doesn't tell anyone what it is. And implying I should search the Federalist Papers for words that make it "quite clear what it meant" might do for a discussion like ours, but it won't work for the national discussion that we are not prepared for. You'll need citations.

In terms of property rights vs Snd Amendment rights of another, in my view it's a no brainer. The peopery owner may very well prohibit you from bearing arms on his property, that is his right. You don't have to enter nor do you have a right to enter without his permission.

That appears to be a claim that "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is not unlimited, that it only extends so far, that it is constrained. But I don't see that meaning in the words of the second amendment. I don't see that the words clearly read that way.

Seriously, as you wrote, the 2nd A acknowledges a right, it doesn't give it, so how can it be infringed by Government and still be within the constraints of the Constitution?

In my view, it can't.

If something is outside the constraints of "The right of the people to keep and bear arms", as you appear to claim in regard to real property owners, then of course government regulation of whatever is outside the constraints is not an infringement.

But that begs the question "What are the constraints, what is inside and what is outside those constraints?". The current answer seems to be "We don't have a good answer".

[Artcore]

“Should this come to pass it will be time for the cop unions to start holding lots of fundraisers to fill the coffers of the ‘Policeman’s Widows and Orphans Fund’.”
____________________________________________________

Sad, but very, very true.

[William Tell]

absalom01 said: "I doubt very much that the feds could count on much support from local LE ..."

I think that may be a mixed bag. Some will support the feds and others won't.

Sheriff Mack of Arizona made a name for himself by challenging federal authority to control what his department must do when the Brady Act was passed. The Supreme Court sided with Mack.

If gun confiscation becomes the program, it will be essential to determine how each and every Sheriff of the various counties in the U.S. sees his role. I would imagine that sheriffs who agree to cooperate with confiscation will find their forces unwelcome on the street. The local sheriff's uniform would become as unwelcome as the blue helmets of the United Nations.

There won't be any middle ground for any law enforcement agency in the U.S. They must either side with the Constitution or against it. They must lead the resistance against tyranny or cease operations.

From a tactical standpoint, non-law enforcement persons cannot afford the possible treachery of a law enforcement organization claiming support for the Constitution and secretly gathering intelligence for the tyrants. I see no middle ground possible.

Local law enforcement must either actively oppose disarmament with all of their resources or disappear from the scene completely. Any activity, whether openly or furtively, by a law enforcement agency to support confiscation would put that agency in the enemy camp.

Accurately determining the stance of local law enforcement would probably be the first order of business in a possible Civil War II scenario.

Those of us in blue states will find ourselves seriously behind enemy lines in case of an outbreak of violence over gun confiscation. For those in blue states, making their way to a red state would be a high priority.

[Bshaw]

“Trigger The Next American Revolution Civil War.

Fixed.”

Thank you, an appreciation does exist for the correctness of the details!

[Errant]

taking all our time preparing to prepare makes US more vulnerable than it makes them!!

We are ALL vulnerable, including those misguided souls on the left. Until this leftist federal government actually moves to confiscate weapons, the wise thing to do, is to organize, prepare, sound alarms, raise hell with our "representatives" and be the "righteous" ones if it comes to a conflict.

The evil incompetence of this gang of tyrants was exposed when fast and furious blew up in their faces. Recently, maybe you've noticed stories and follow-ups about Sandy Hook are missing in the news - wonder why? Maybe folks are starting to figure out that something is wrong here. And even if those pushing gun confiscation are not directly responsible, they are indirectly, by leaving those innocent children and staffers defenseless against an evil, deranged killer.

We are living in different world today from our parents and grandparents. Evil is running amuck. Those pushing out God while pushing to promote immoral behavior, to run our lives, or even to take the life of an unborn or elderly person, are very much to blame. The evil they've unleashed is why nowadays, we must take steps to protect ourselves from it.

But it only takes one person with guts and a conscience to expose a group of evil conspirators; public calls for justice will do the rest. We need to buy a little more time, in the hope that person will come forward.

In any event, more of us than you would think, know what it means to be an American; we won't go so quietly like many others, if God forbid, it comes to that :

[DustyMoment]

Until this leftist federal government actually moves to confiscate weapons, the wise thing to do, is to organize, prepare, sound alarms waste of time. No one is listening and you will appear to be an alarmist nutcase until the roof caves in, raise hell with our "representatives" who don't care because politicians are all cowards and cut from the same cloth and be the "righteous" ones if it comes to a conflict.

The "righteous" ones if it comes to a conflict? Don't you mean be on the "right" side when it comes to a conflict!??

The parts of the puzzle are all visible to those who will look at them and see what is coming. Zero is planning a surprise move to subjugate us before we can get rid of him. He won't have a news conference to tell us he's coming, he's coming!!

Everything is almost in place. Planning and organing NOW are great things. But planning on planning and preparing to prepare waste precious time we don't have.

[Private_Sector_Does_It_Better]

I would like to see someone organize a “million” gun march on the White House. Peaceful, but a million law abiding Americans openly exercising their 2nd amendment rights in defiance of DCs illegal anti-gun laws.

[Errant]

Don't you mean be on the "right" side when it comes to a conflict!??

This gun confiscation effort is just one element of a plan to bring us under a world order, and it will take time.

Before it could take place, other events such as war or a global economic collapse could happen overnight.

Planning and organing NOW are great things.

It's what I advocate as the wise thing to do for now. That and getting your preparations in order. Start at the local government level. The NRA and other national organizations could be doing more to set up local chapters and get on with planning the fight.

Zero is planning a surprise move to subjugate us before we can get rid of him. He won't have a news conference to tell us he's coming, he's coming!!

It's not Zero, IMO he doesn't have a real say in matters, it's the global elite and progressives behind the office he occupies that threaten our freedom and independence.

The whole world knows that to conquer America, who must first disarm its people; hence the Chinese and Russian governments calling for it.

...planning on planning and preparing to prepare waste precious time we don't have.

I think we're open to suggestions that comply with the law of the land, i.e., Constitution. ;)

[Errant]

That would be a great event for the NRA and the other gun groups to organize. Count me in!

[SuperLuminal]

Yep!

[DuncanWaring]

Note “they” cannot win a war of attrition against 3% of “us”.

[Las Vegas Ron]

OK, so "it is what it is", but that doesn't tell anyone what it is. And implying I should search the Federalist Papers for words that make it "quite clear what it meant" might do for a discussion like ours,

First let me say I didn't mean to imply that you should go read the Federalist Papers, second, if it came across in a snarky way I apologize as I really didn't mean it that way.

As for the "is what it is" comment, if we cannot understand simple written words and every one of them has to be held to interpretation, then I would suggest that there could be no such thing as a binding contract. Words have meanings that do not need to be interpreted, especially when they are used in an unambiguous way.

That appears to be a claim that "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is not unlimited, that it only extends so far, that it is constrained. But I don't see that meaning in the words of the second amendment. I don't see that the words clearly read that way.

I think you are confusing an important issue here. The Constitution was written to limit the Federal Government (and the State via the 10th), not the individual.

For a property owner to deny you access to his land, for any reason, is his right. He is the one directing the constraints, not the Government.

Nevada is a open carry state as well as shall issue. It is quite common to see "Weapons Prohibited" at entrances to many establishments here especially Casino's. They have that right to do so as you have the choice to enter or not, you do not have a right to enter. However, I believe they assume 100% liability for your safety in doing so.

You will also see Government buildings with the same signs, that in my view is unconstitutional as it is the government infringing on your right to bear arms.

That would be one SOUS challenge I would love to see but have no illusions how the ruling would come down.

If something is outside the constraints of "The right of the people to keep and bear arms", as you appear to claim in regard to real property owners, then of course government regulation of whatever is outside the constraints is not an infringement.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying there so we can leave that part for later if you wish to pursue it.

But that begs the question "What are the constraints, what is inside and what is outside those constraints?". The current answer seems to be "We don't have a good answer".

Again, it depends on who is doing the constraining. The Government is prohibited but in the case of a property owner he is not.

I guess the old saying "your rights end where mine begin" could apply here.

[DustyMoment]

I think we're open to suggestions that comply with the law of the land, i.e., Constitution. ;)

In case you missed it, the rule of law is dead and zero is shreding the Constitution as we speak.

When zero sends his minions out to begin the gun confiscation, it will be either DHS reps or military. I, personally, am prepared to tell whoever comes to my door to confiscate my guns the following: "I do not recognize or acknowledge the authority of the president to violate my Second Amendment rights, nor his circumventing of the Constitution. My guns are my personal property and are not the domain of the federal government. If you take one step inside of my house, one of us will die."

[DustyMoment]

If you haven’t already done so, I strongly encourage you to read the article at this address: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52005

Msny of the things mentioned are already in place.

And, the clock is ticking.

[Errant]

"If you take one step inside of my house, one of us will die."

Guess who that's going to be! - Probably before you even have a chance to utter the words.

That's not a plan, that's suicide and leaving your poor wife and children at risk and to clean up the mess, to boot.

Not only must we be righteous and do our best to follow the law of the land, we have to go at it with brain fully engaged. Remember Patton’s words about how you win a war; said in while standing in front to that huge American flag? They’re just as true today. Those that win the fight, get to write about it – from their perspective.

Here are some ideas I saw on the Internet somewhere:

1.Remove the reason storm troopers would come to your house in the first place, or make it a useless endeavor. All I own now is an old single action 45 and a lever action long gun.

2.Establish caches of supplies and “tools” which you can reach short term, medium term, and longer term.

3.Learn how to prevent caches from being discovered (e.g., lower radar/metal detector signatures, no Millar, make use of trash/debris).

4.Do not act until the last possible moment and all other avenues have been exhausted. This lowers risk of being “rounded up”, and requires tyrants to expend resources while conserving yours. Ever hear the term, “Hold your fire until you see the whites of their eyes?”

5.Confrontations should be planned and take place at seats of power (i.e., you local county court house, etc). You will find like minded patriots with a vast array of skills and resources that can be pooled. The newsies will be there; word will get out and help much in the battle for the hearts and minds of your fellow citizens. If you can’t get the support of your local sheriff/leaders, assembly somewhere you can. BTW, assemblies are protected under the constitution.

6.Do not commit all of your resistance to these demonstrations. Learn about the art of war, and the methods of winning war (all I’m gonna say about that).

7.Put this out on the courthouse lawn for all to see:

[Errant]

I strongly encourage you to read the article

I've read it on a number of sites and even watched AJ interview him. Sounds plausible but it could also be subterfuge.

I'm telling ya, the best things to do is quietly prepare, be patient, stay cool, organize, raise hell with representatives, and plan on having demonstrations (perhaps even peacefully armed ones IF they do pass something and come after the guns). In the meantime, let's go about our lives with enthusiasm.

Anything else will just be playing into their hands, IMO.