Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
What? It gets brought up here everyday- i.e., a well armed citizenry helps to ensure that we remain a republic free from tyranny.
Sled is the armed rebellion fetishist.
The real check is against the incremental creep governmental overstep, and the tyranny of dependence.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
What? It gets brought up here everyday- i.e., a well armed citizenry helps to ensure that we remain a republic free from tyranny.
Sled is the armed rebellion fetishist.
The real check is against the incremental creep governmental overstep, and the tyranny of dependence.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Also a great example of the soft tyranny of dependence.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
GOP statist division. Trust the government to protect your rights
OK, Boomer.
I trust Democracy and the Constitutional Process to protect my rights. The American citizenry has more and better guns than we've ever had access to in our entire history.
Seems like the 2A has been winning for the most part.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
Look at the military guys that post here
They wouldn't shoot me on the orders of some fascist
The USA hasn't won a war where they couldn't flatten the place. Same with the USSR
Enough armed citizens make the price too high. VC 101
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
Look at the military guys that post here
They wouldn't shoot me on the orders of some fascist
The USA hasn't won a war where they couldn't flatten the place. Same with the USSR
Enough armed citizens make the price too high. VC 101
What was missing in Venezuela were the guns
No, they wouldn't. Our service members believe in freedom and democracy and and won't fight and die for a totalitarian regime.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
Look at the military guys that post here
They wouldn't shoot me on the orders of some fascist
The USA hasn't won a war where they couldn't flatten the place. Same with the USSR
Enough armed citizens make the price too high. VC 101
What was missing in Venezuela were the guns
No, they wouldn't. Our service members believe in freedom and democracy and and won't fight and die for a totalitarian regime.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
Look at the military guys that post here
They wouldn't shoot me on the orders of some fascist
The USA hasn't won a war where they couldn't flatten the place. Same with the USSR
Enough armed citizens make the price too high. VC 101
What was missing in Venezuela were the guns
No, they wouldn't. Our service members believe in freedom and democracy and and won't fight and die for a totalitarian regime.
And there we are
Peace in our time
I'm out, you fucking jerks. BDTW has said they'd take me.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
Just my 0.02 but IMO the last rifle ban raised a lot of awareness that ultimately led to the rollback of the law. Now, the semi automatic Armalite Rifle form is the most popular in the USA, and any attempt to grab it is bound to be met with a lot more resistance.
^^ That, bigly.
In addition, 1994 vs. 2020 probably has some reportage or visibility bias. Less likelihood of grassroots efforts being seen.
ATBS, tacticool cosplay is gay.
Which is all I fucking said in the first place, before getting gang raped in this thread for having the nerve to make fun of militia bros.
We don't cotton racism here. Very much
If there is a real God, Race should Photoshop a Kangol boiler cap over the Carhartt beanie.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
You act like all of the weapons and personnel in the state military will remain so.
Not terrorists but yes they are saying that they will not allow the government to strip their constitutional rights from them. This is the very mechanism the founders intended when the government over reaches and it can't be resolved.
The left is importing voters that will vote for their free shit. It is a plan to flip the nation in one direction. Socialism is not constitutional either.
Don't the courts have to weigh in first before we can conclude if the citizen's of VA have lost a constitutionally protected right? This is step 1 in the process which the Founders intended. Seemed to work out fine for gun owners in Washington, DC last I checked.
Where were the milita bros in 1994 when Clinton signed the AWB? Why didn't they take up arms to defend 2A rights then?
DC is still fucked and going back to the supremes as we speak.
They haven't shot anyone. HTH
But I hear all this TUFF talk in the Tug about the necessity to demonstrate to the State Government of VA the willingness of patriots to die for their freedom and prevent tyranny. Where were these folks in 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons ban went into effect? That legislation seemed like far more of an assault on the 2A than anything being proposed today. Why was there no revolt?
Probably has to do with the fact that we live in a world where the media is far more populous in nature than then and people can self-organize more easily. Terrible things for democracy.
Well, my fren, as a gun owner and 2nd amendment supporter I guess I am just fucking lost sometimes. So the point of dressing up in Army gear and toting ARs to the State Capital is to demonstrate a willingness of armed resistance against a tyranny of the majority coming from the DC era metro progressives? And yet just a few decades a go the Feds came for our? guns (1994) to an extent of which is incomprehensible in 2020 and yet no one did a god damned thing. I can't square in my head.
You're just looking for a reason to mock something along with the cool kids
Its not 1994
You could make a plausible case that it wasn't a slippery slope but now we know it was
They are coming to get the guns
Americans stand up to the government and you shit on them. Another Mr Conservative
It was winning elections that got the Assault Weapons Ban to expire. Not guys threatening armed resistance to the government.
Who threatened arm resistance to the government?
You are peddling the bullshit narrative that was given to you before anyone even showed up
Black face racist governor down south have tried to disarm Blacks for centuries
For fucks sake there are few thing more American than protests.
I suppose we should have just elected our way out of Vietnam
It was heavily armed white paramilitary groups that ended Reconstruction and created 100 years of Jim Crow. Only Federal troops staying in the South for decades could have ensured civil rights for the freed slaves. Ironic if you ask me.
So guns were needed to ensure civil rights for freed slaves?
Yes, in the form of Federal troops with guns. Armed former slaves got massacred regularly during the Reconstruction period. They were outnumbered.
So there are times guns are required to defend rights.
Yes, there are times when the State (with guns) has to defend the rights of minorities against armed militias (with guns).
But never the need to defend rights against the state with guns. That never happens.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
The State has had a near monopoly on REAL force since the late 1800s pretty much.
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
You act like all of the weapons and personnel in the state military will remain so.
It's hard to say. They didn't in 1861. The Southern States got most of the equipment from the Federal arsenals there.
Comments
The real check is against the incremental creep governmental overstep, and the tyranny of dependence.
So just allow the state to have a monopoly on force.
Might as well not even play the game.
GOP statist division. Trust the government to protect your rights
In 1861 it was pretty much a fair fight. Big Ten had rifled muskets and cannons. SEC/ACC had rifled muskets and cannons.
Much has changed.
I trust Democracy and the Constitutional Process to protect my rights. The American citizenry has more and better guns than we've ever had access to in our entire history.
Seems like the 2A has been winning for the most part.
They wouldn't shoot me on the orders of some fascist
The USA hasn't won a war where they couldn't flatten the place. Same with the USSR
Enough armed citizens make the price too high. VC 101
What was missing in Venezuela were the guns
Peace in our time