If democraps win in November they will have that ONE VOTE.
Not all lefties would have been happy with that...
Charging the 2000 presidential election was 'rigged', the DUmmies swore they were not going to allow it to happen again in 2004 (Kerry defeated like Al Gore in 2000).
Arming the Left: Is the time now?
Post from: Lori Price CLG (1000+ posts) Sun Feb-22-2004 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Yes, spread the word, even if you *didn't* read it, that there *will* be riots! Yes! Riots, and a whole lot more!..."
Democratic Underground blogger ("happyslug": 1000+ posts) responds...
"if it is decided to fight, be prepared to fight, bring a backpack, entrenching tool, tent, and other equipment of an Infantrymen. You will need it for Bush and his supporters decides it is better to fight than to accept the will of the people, the fight to overthrow them will be a long fight."
"...it takes three things to overthrow a tyrant;...
1. Popular support, you must have the majority of the people on your side (i.e. Democracy, even the Communists and Islamics both try to show they have the Support of the Majority of the People),
2. Organization to perform the overthrow (This is why Madison wrote the First like he did, these are HOW you organize an opposition. Without the First it is hard to organize an opposition and any resistence organized in absence of the rights stated in the First tend to be as tyrannical as what you are opposing)
3. Weapons to push the issue if the leadership that is being overthrown tries to use force to stay in power. You have to be willing to answer force with force. Weapons do not overthrow a tyrant, weapons just protect the people who are overthrowing a tyrant."
"Now, you may say "Hay, you are talking about Islamic and/or Communists groups not 'Western Liberal resistence groups'". And you would be correct. As I said in the beginning the first step in a guerilla war against a tyrant is to first organize. The Islamic and Communists Groups were the best at organizing people. "Western Liberal Resistence Groups" were less effective in organizing resistence groups (And less liked by the CIA and KGB who tended to fund these groups, remember any war is expensive, money talks).
Furthermore since most Islamic and Communist groups tend to be the first groups outlawed they tend to go underground first. Once underground they start to organize and as other groups are outlawed those groups tend to join the opposition which tends to be either Islamic or Communistic. Once outlawed these groups also tend to be controlled by the most fanatic opponents of the Tyrants and these tend to be either Islamic or Communistic. Thus to oppose the Tyrants you have to support a side with enough discipline to get the job done and that tend to be Communist or Islamic."
"...Any weapons we resort to must be "real" weapons not pistols. i.e. Rifles and shotguns. Due to concerns of re-supply (you have to plan for a long battle) such weapons should be limited to very small number of different rounds. Generally restrict yourself to the following rounds:
5.56x 45 (.223 Remington) 7.62x 63 (30-06) 7.62x 51 (.308 Winchester or 7.62 NATO) 7.62 x 39 (7.62mm Russian 7.62 AK Round) 12 Gauge Shotgun. 30-30 Winchester."
"You have more weapons in the above calibers than any other calibers thus should be your first choice in weapons. Saying this I must point out I like the 7x57 and 7.92x57 Mauser rounds and the M1898 Mauser Bolt action Rifle, but the 7.92 (sometime called 8mm Mauser) but these rounds are less common than the above and thus harder to obtain when re-supply is needed (and re-supply will be needed if the struggle lasts for any length of time).
Re-supply of Ammunition has always been the bane of any military operations. Without ammunition you can not fight. To get you ammunition, it is easier if we can keep the number of different rounds to a minimum (i.e. 5.56x45 and 7.62x51). I list the 30-06 and 30-30 winchester rounds for these are two VERY popular rounds and ammunition for both are easy to obtain (the same with the 12 Gauge shotgun). I list the 7.62 AK round do to the huge number of SKSs and AKs imported since the fall of the Soviet Union. I list it for while there are probably more 30-30s and 30-06 rifles out they than 7.62 Aks and SKSs, the Aks and SKSs may very while outnumber the rifles in 5.56x45 and 7.62 NATO.
Also, if it is decided to fight, be prepared to fight, bring a backpack, entrenching tool, tent, and other equipment of an Infantrymen. You will need it for Bush and his supporters decides it is better to fight than to accept the will of the people, the fight to overthrow them will be a long fight."
[end of excerpts...but many other just as crazy thoughts found at the following link. This thread continued for THREE entire weeks before the moderator finally stepped in. But as of today, Wednesday, June 26, 2008, the thread is still up on the Democratic Underground website.-ETL]
Democratic Underground Discussion Board
Topic: "Arming the Left: Is the time now?":
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x41313
"Lori Price CLG (1000+ posts) Sun Feb-22-04 11:17 PM Response to Reply #10
16. Yes, spread the word, even if you *didn't* read it, that there *will* be riots! Yes! Riots, and a whole lot more!..."
_________________________________________________________
CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.
CLG General Manager is Lori Price.
News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government (CLG)
http://www.legitgov.org/
Ready for Revolution? Join CLG's Revolution Tactics Group and Get Ready to Overthrow the Establishment.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CLG_Revolution_Tactics/
“ONE MORE VOTE and they would be confiscating our guns.”
Not until I was out of ammo, and possibly out of blood.
Well Bill.....they will have to know who has the guns.
But please, we must make sure to be really nice to the other side on issues like this, maintain our decorum and civility and have a darn fine discussion over this stuff. Because it’s important that we make sure to follow the lead of Ivy League liberal Republicans whose soft, wuss-ass approach to dealing with our enemies has set us up for a continuing fall we are enduring. Great job, pussies.
This is true, I suppose — but only to a point. Even if we’d have lost Heller, most States have a arms bearing amendment without the “militia” ambiguity.
For instance, the Texas Constitution ...
- Section 23 - RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.
Heller, had it gone the other way, would merely have ALLOWED the regulation of firearms — it wouldn’t have banned them. Unlike the abortion decision, Heller would’ve simply left gun regulation within the purview of state’s rights.
Would’ve been a bad decision, nonetheless ... but it wouldn’t have changed anything. States have been operating as if they had free reign to regulate gun ownership for decades ... some, like DC, choose to ban. Some, like Texas and New Hampshire, chose not to. That would’ve continued.
Luckily, we don’t have to continue fighting state-by-state anymore.
On a related note ... Texas is looking to move from concealed carry to open carry.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5851852.html
H
He knows his draconian gun laws are next for court. And if the DC law was unconstitutional Chicago's are, and in spades. Since 1982 handguns couldn't legally be in the city - period (for lowly citizens anyway). That's the last year a handgun registration was approved by the CPD. Even a Cap Pistol is *supposed* to be registered with the Police annually (I'm series). That's how nutty Chicago's gun laws are. That's why I never understood the 'DC has the strictest gun law' stuff. They have nothing on Chicago.
Not quite. There are quite a few States whose contract to enter the union contained a clause explicitly declaring the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right.
Often close votes, with strongly worded dissents, are negotiated to ensure that the decision has only the necessary minimum impact, and not register a complete revolution in the law. I.e. the decision is that in outright banning individual ownership DC went to far, but this does not send any signal about existing regulation of firearms.