Posted on 02/17/2013 7:14:01 AM PST by EXCH54FE
his State of the Union address, President Obama doubled down on his gun-control proposals, again demanding that Congress ban so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazines. This is not a surprise. What has been a surprise are the increasingly open calls for defiance from gun owners, state legislatures, and local law enforcement. If the presidents proposals become law, he may move the country into turbulent waters we havent seen in many years.
Gun control has long been a controversial issue in American politics. However, there are three aspects to this issue that make this more volatile than other hot topics such as taxes, foreign policy, or abortion:
1) The strongest advocates of each side hold fundamentally irreconcilable positions.
On one hand, committed gun-control advocates say: No one should be allowed to own certain weapons. On the other hand, equally committed gun-rights advocates say: No way in hell are we giving up these weapons.
2) Ordinary Americans have declared their willingness to disobey the law.
New York state has already passed laws similar to Obamas proposals. Gun owners there are now organizing a campaign of open civil disobedience, daring state officials to come and take their rifles. State officials already acknowledge that they will be unable to enforce the new law.
3) Local law enforcement officials and state governments have also vowed civil disobedience.
Over 280 sheriffs and eight state sheriffs associations have vowed to protect citizens Second Amendment rights against new gun laws.
The Utah Sheriffs Association used unusually strong language:
We, like you, swore a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and we are prepared to trade our lives for the preservation of its traditional interpretation.
Similarly, several state legislatures are considering laws to stop federal officials from enforcing new gun laws
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Our side will 'organize' in days - when called...
Conservatives aren't like liberals elites who pay protesters to show up.
When conservatives organize there aren't buses filled with paid union goons - there aren't young people offered minimum wage - recruited off Craig's list.. yes, we're all seen the 'Occupy' ads run by old liberal elites - what a hoot - elites don't pay the kids crap - just want young faces...
(Liberals aborted most of their kids - now they wonder why their movement is old - old and elite or young and stupid... abortion does that...)
Remember the Chick fil A protest?
Almost a million people showed up with a few days notice. The MSM didn't push it - except for trying to get gays to come out and kiss each other. Liberals couldn't get 50 gays to come out on short notice... even with the promise of kiss up coverage from the MSM. The two bit jerks at the New York Times with all their power to 'make news' by giving an "OK" to all other newspapers - couldn't get 50 gays to show up. This will be the same.
This would be the same.
Professional blowhards and dem liars have no idea that 'AstroTurf' crap isn't 't believable to the people who matter. The people who swing the culture.
When the time comes - and I hope it never does - this will just happen. Quickly and in a large way... for now we're all still talking... Dems hate this issue. It showcases what idiots they are... and they can't fake support for their side... well except for the most stupid of liberal voters
The president of the national sheriff’s association of the USA is Larry Amerson of Calhoun County, Alabama. Amerson is a dimocrat. He has many photos in the main lobby of the sheriff’s office with him with slimeball Joe Biden. Recently he was at the White House kissing Obama’s butt. There were stories and photos of it in the newspapers here in NE Alabama. Amerson supports the dimocrats in taking away our guns. You in Alabama reading this, don’t believe what Amerson says in public. He is lying. I know all about him. I know some of his family members and that is the story they tell of him. He is a dim. Afraid he might lose the next election because he might be held liable by republicans and gun lovers about him and his anti-gun stance in private and lying in public on his stance. Has thought of jumping over to the republicans to keep from losing his job. But, afraid to PO his dim pals and they might run someone else against him. There is a rumor in Calhoun County that there is a movement in the Oxford Police Department to run one of their guys against him to get rid of him. He is a coward and afraid of what to do for his public view. He has to support Obama’s deals or lose his dim followers.
Yes, I hope so.
We have become a nation of sheep, and there is no going back. The fight has been fought - we lost.
The fight is not over until I am dead!
G
Good point! It’ll come down to, do they want their job, or to uphold the Constitution. Hopefully they can keep their job while disobeying the order.
The State of New York would be “unable to enforce the new law?” What a shame! I would CERTAINLY like to see them TRY!
I live in Kentucky, where we have a leftist Dem in the governor’s mansion, but mainly conservatives—or at least not lunatics—in the legislature. State Reps are not INSANE enough to consider gun confiscation. Not in THIS state. They are aware of the consequences. They realize that any serious attempt to enforce it—breaking into homes, stealing property, shooting gun owners—would end in legislators being stacked like cordwood in front of the capital building in Frankfort.
Apparently New York politicians don’t believe that can happen to them.
“When we can no longer vote, then the fight will have been totally lost. Until then we can throw the numbskulls out of office....and that doesnt require killing or being killed.”
We still vote, but voter fraud is now the rule of the land and voting is no longer a tool of the people. We’ve gone from the ballot box to the next box, which is a key word to turn on the recorders.
It’s gonna get ugly fast, IMHO.
Lots of Sheriffs saying that gun grabs are a no-go.
I like that trend...
Yes. Emphatically.
How so?
We've already read about the first casualty of New York's ban on high capacity magazines, a vet who was arrested for simply having such magazines in the trunk of his car.
Where was the call to arms? Anybody go running to his rescue?
So who's going to be the first source of insurrection, you? What are you going to do if you receive a letter from your local PD to turn in your AR-15 or whatever banned firearm you may have in your posession that they are aware of?
You gonna make a stand? You gonna go out in a blaze of glory? I doubt it!
You've got a job, a mortgage on your house, payments to make on your F-150 truck, your bass boat and maybe even your kid's college tuition to worry about. And your other kid probably has baseball or soccer tryouts next weekend.......
And if you're stupid enough to throw all that away and make a stand, don't expect any help from anyone else because they've likely got the same responsibilities to worry about and you're the least of their worries.
You're on your own dude, good luck!
As a side note, where were YOU when Randy Weaver made HIS stand? Or more importantly, where was everybody else that you assume are going to participate in this "Widespread Civil Disobedience"?
There’s been no human casualty, no loss of life — yet. That’s the tipping point. When tyrannical forces starting burning homes, killing people in defense of their God given inherent natural rights. Let’s retain the high moral ground. Let the tyrants make the first move as gun bans, mag bans, private party bans, yada yada bans are ignored flagrantly and not complied with. Just war concept requires it.
Well, there's this.
Looks like they're trying to make a stab at peaceful resolution -- IMO, it's not enough; the politicians need to be punished for overstepping their bounds. There are ways to do this, for example these two laws are applicable, and federal felonies, to every person who (a) voted for the law, (b) signed it into law, and (c) tries to implement it. [legislature, governor, and law-enforcement; respectively.]
But the above would be trying to use the law as a weapon to counterattack; something I think the average citizen shies away from... especially how the faculty of reason has been disparaged (especially in law).
Seems pretty obvious that they will. Who honestly thinks Texans will willingly and without objection turn in their firearms to the federal government? I suspect that anyone in Congress with a properly functioning human brain knows that ain’t happening.
That's a pretty dismal percentage IMO.
Exactly. It’s time to shoot the bastards, as Claire put it... But we can’t be the ones to cast the first stone. No Fort Sumters.
Words to live and die by. Obama will have to murder me to get what I use for self protection.
You got to be kidding me.
You dont believe that do you?
How do you propose delegates to a convention would be chosen?
If it is by election, the same bums as are in the Senate will be there.
They would then throw out all the protections we have in there.
It would be worse after they screwed it up.
It would not even have to have any super-majority of the states as it is now.
That arrest and detention is based on a law passed years ago, relating to "Large capacity ammunition feeding device."
NYS Penal Law section 265.00 - Definitions
NYS Penal Law section 265.02 - 3rd Degree Criminal possession
A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree when: ... (8) Such person possesses a large capacity ammunition feeding device. Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree is a class D felony.
That is being revised by Cuomo's new law, which redifines large capacity ammunition feeding device, and also reduces the criminal penalty from a felony to a misdemeanor.
New York Criminal Attorney Blog <- These stories will piss you off
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.