Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
To: Second Amendment First
And “mysterious”? WTF, headline writer? 5000 idiots from out of town wearing masks and throwing Molotov cocktails aren’t mysterious, I guess.
28 posted on
11/29/2014 3:59:38 PM PST by
denydenydeny
("World History is not full of good governments, or of good voters either "--P.J. O'Rourke)
To: Second Amendment First
My guess is these “cops” are DHS, and not local guys...?
It appears DHS is there mainly to make sure local cops don’t “overreach their authority”.
I think you know what that REALLY means...
30 posted on
11/29/2014 4:01:19 PM PST by
gaijin
To: Second Amendment First
Ignore the police and if they attempt to engage, shoot. A bad cop is no cop.
To: Second Amendment First
The day will come when the powers that be will wish they had not been so foolish.
The deadly disease of liberalism seems harmless for those who suffer it, but its effects quietly build until it kills in a mere moment of terror, the last thoughts being...oh what have I done...
35 posted on
11/29/2014 4:12:59 PM PST by
PoloSec
( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
To: Second Amendment First
Threatened with arrest for operating without a license A license to do what, exactly? Issued by whom? Approved by whom? Overseen by whom? How does one apply? What are the criteria for approval? For denial? For renewal? For revocation?
This sounds like the usual 'permit' excuse used to shut down parades, lemonade stands, bake sales, you name it.
It sounds officious and is obviously used as a threat but isn't it a case of police misquoting, misapplying the law or simply making it up?
44 posted on
11/29/2014 4:51:09 PM PST by
relictele
(Principiis obsta & Finem respice - Resist The Beginnings & Consider The Ends)
To: Second Amendment First
Further proof, if further proof is needed that the authorities wanted a riot. and also more evidence, if again more evidence is needed, that the police have switched from protecting the law abiding Citizens to controlling the law abiding Citizens.
46 posted on
11/29/2014 4:51:40 PM PST by
sport
To: Second Amendment First
There is not a bad situation that will not be made worse by involving the police. And that includes rioting.
If armed citizens were allowed to take out a few of the perpetually offended you can be damn well sure that the looting would have stopped RIGHT NOW.
57 posted on
11/29/2014 5:23:50 PM PST by
43north
(BHO: 50% black, 50% white, 100% RED.)
To: Second Amendment First
Threatened with arrest for operating without a license,... License? License for what? To protect private property?
63 posted on
11/29/2014 5:36:12 PM PST by
Timber Rattler
(Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
To: Second Amendment First
Of course they don’t want real patriots doing their jobs.
66 posted on
11/29/2014 5:54:12 PM PST by
metmom
(...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
To: Second Amendment First
70 posted on
11/29/2014 8:10:17 PM PST by
PGalt
To: Second Amendment First
You need a license to stand armed on a rooftop? Where’s the NRA?
71 posted on
11/29/2014 8:27:40 PM PST by
1010RD
(First, Do No Harm)
To: Second Amendment First
76 posted on
11/29/2014 10:38:40 PM PST by
WildHighlander57
((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2001)
To: Second Amendment First
Bull crap. Since when is a license needed? If you are operating a business and making money that's when. Why? Because the local government wants fees - made from paying for the license - they want part of the revenue made.
Volunteers don't have any revenue. Some neighbor can't drop by and help out? By this reasoning anyone helping to clean up trash and rubble needs a license. More Stupidity.
77 posted on
11/30/2014 1:03:42 AM PST by
greeneyes
(Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Le//t Freedom Ring.)
To: Second Amendment First
If the government, at whatever level, fails in its duty to protect its citizens, through whom they have been given the power to govern, they lose their right to hold office.
To put a finer point on it, when a local police force fails to keep order, and obstructs the citizenry from protecting itself, they have just become as much a target as any other oppressor or lawbreaker.
96 posted on
11/30/2014 8:20:20 AM PST by
jimbug
To: Second Amendment First
If the police can’t do the job right, they will prevent those who can, from doing it.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson