The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
I'm Not Giving Up My Guns---Time to Dump Trump?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
TrumpGuns

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There is an old joke, known I am sure to most of my listeners, about the Second Coming.

A senior cardinal rushes into the Pope’s office at the Vatican. “Holy Father, Holy Father, come look! The most amazing thing has happened?”

“What?” asks the Pope.

“Jesus Christ has returned! He is riding through the streets of Rome on a donkey! The people are strewing palm leaves under his feet! Oh, Holy Father, what shall we do? What shall we do?”

The pontiff thinks hard for a moment, then says: “Look busy!”

That instinct to look busy is common to all bureaucratic organizations, including of course the federal government. It seized President Trump this week. On Wednesday, February 28, he held an hour-long televised session at the White House with a group of federal legislators from both parties. [Trump surprises lawmakers in backing some tougher gun controls, By Anne Gearan, Mike DeBonis and Seung Min Kim, Washington Post, February 28, 2018]

The supposed object of the exercise was to work out something Congress might do in the way of new federal laws, something that would prevent horrors like the recent school shooting in Florida.

The meeting itself was a lousy idea. When Trump proposed it to his staffers they should have gagged him, bound him hand and foot, strapped him to a chair, and made him watch looped re-runs of the previous televised meeting with congresscritters. That was the one on January 9th to discuss immigration policy. Reporting on it at the time, I said that “the President seemed clumsy and ill-informed.”

Mine was one of the milder reactions. Tucker Carlson thought the January 9th immigration meeting was a disaster.

All right; but I was striving to avoid despair. Trump’s all we’ve got—we, citizens who would rather not watch our country turned into a multicultural slum. On the National Question, every current political alternative to Trump is far worse.

After watching this last show, however, I have to admit, despair is getting hard to fend off. Trump was simply terrible. As in the January meeting, he agreed enthusiastically with the last person who spoke, even when that person had said the opposite thing to what the previous person had said. I found myself thinking: Does Trump actually understand words and meanings? This is the Great Negotiator?

This tendency of Trump’s was so obvious even the congresscritters themselves noticed it. Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska told reporters after the event that:

Strong leaders don’t automatically agree with the last thing that was said to them … We’re not ditching any Constitutional protections simply because the last person the president talked to today doesn’t like them. [GOP senator scolds Trump: We have due process ‘for a reason’, by Brett Samuels, March 2, 2018]

We were told after the January 9th fiasco that, off-camera following the meeting, the President gathered his wits and said more sensible things. And we’re being told the same now.

Well, maybe; but then, why let him hold these meetings on air, where he comes across as a dithering doofus? We know Trump’s a TV freak who loves having those cameras on him, but can’t anyone on his staff restrain him?

If you think I’m being harsh, check out some other reactions from our side of the national conversation.

The Z-Man, for example. Z—that’s the name I refer to him by, not a pronoun—Z is one of the smartest bloggers on the Dissident Right. Following the White House meeting on gun control, he dumped Trump with a vengeance. Sample quotes:

  • [Trump’s] latest antics over the gun issue … suggest that he’s just a stupid bullshitter who got very lucky …
  • Trump is making the classic Republican error of taking advice from his enemies …
  • It is no longer possible to argue that his maneuverings are 4-D chess. Trump is simply an unreliable liar …
  • The pro-gun voter has no sense of humor on this stuff and they have zero tolerance for limp-wristed politicians too afraid of the girls to do the right thing. Speaking only for myself, I’d vote for a gay black Muslim over Trump right now …
  • The damage he has done to the cause of gun rights is incalculable and it will not be forgotten. Unless he eventually signs off on some bold pro-gun laws, lots of his voters will choose to spend the election day at the range come 2020.

[Not My President, March 2, 2018]

Ouch! Z is, as I said, a thoughtful guy who hardly ever sounds really angry. This week he did. And if Trump’s Wednesday performance did this to him, it likely did much worse to a lot of less cerebral voters. It may not be too much of a stretch to say that Trump lost his party the 2018 midterms with this meeting.

This is not a happy time for National Conservatives. The hopes raised by Donald Trump’s election have pretty much evaporated. Sure, we got some conservative judges; although there are still way too many of the other kind who fancy themselves legislators, [Judge Permanently Bars Indiana From Blocking Syrian Refugees, AP, March 1, 2018 ] and Congress shows no appetite for restraining them, as it easily could. What else did we get?

A tax cut? Uh-huh. Funny, I don’t recall that being a major issue in the 2016 election.

Talking the other day with a like-minded friend, he said

I could see, back in 2016, there was a huge opening waiting for some canny politician to exploit it, to drive a coach and four through it. It was in plain sight! Yet the politicians all ignored it. Only Donald Trump saw it. Why did it have to be him? Why couldn’t some competent, Washington-smart politician have seen the opening?

The answer. I guess, is that politicians of our age are terminally timid, when they’re not actually corrupt and just dancing to their donors’ tunes.

So should we just yield to despair? Well, not entirely. It’s possible, though, that someone less useless than Trump will have learned the lesson of 2016: that even in this age of suffocating, stultifying Political Correctness, there is a hunger for a bold and direct approach to our nation’s problems. Let’s nurse that hope for 2020.

And what should be done to minimize the possibility of another atrocity like the one in Florida?

I just don’t see how federal laws and regulations are going to help. The ones I’ve seen spelled out fall into two categories.

  • Category One: suggestions that are just plainly unconstitutional and will be struck down by the courts.

The suggestion our President extruded on Wednesday falls into Category One: “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”. Was that some drunk sounding off in a bar? No, that was the President of the United States.

  • Category Two: proposals, like those on more background checks or or mental health assessments, which would stretch the operational competence of the federal government agencies to breaking point.
ORDER IT NOW

Look, I’m not saying that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, please don’t take offense. Some federal agencies do a great job. I’ve interacted some with the Social Security Administration, and always found them polite and efficient.

And in the zone of immigration I very much want to see our laws firmly and fairly enforced. If I didn’t think the relevant agencies could do that, I wouldn’t bother speaking and writing about it. What would be the point?

Likewise, I want Congress to pass new and better laws on immigration, and I believe federal legislators are capable of doing that, if enough of them will lash themselves to the mast and ignore the siren songs of donors and ethnic lobbies.

Immigration control is comparatively straightforward, though. You’re either a citizen, or you’re not. You either fall into one of the categories admitted for lawful settlement, or you don’t. There are no conceptual ambiguities in immigration control.

The operational chaos in immigration arises from the union of two very powerful forces. One is a determination on the part of big money interests—the cheap-labor lobbies—to thwart enforcement or improvement of the people’s laws. The other is an ideology of ethnomasochism, a hatred for Western civilization that has captured the educated classes of the West and filled them with a longing to drown our nations in a flood of non-Western immigrants.

Gun control isn’t like that. The immigration issue is conceptually clear-cut: the gun issue isn’t.

The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”? What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.

Modern legislation has only multiplied the ambiguities. What precisely counts as an “assault rifle”? Who gets to decide whether I am mentally healthy or not?

These are the kinds of gray areas that federal agencies are not good at policing, and that federal legislators are not good at defining. We have seen this with the FBI bungling in the Florida case, and in experience with the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, concerning which there is still debate, fourteen years after the ban expired, as to whether it had any effect at all. [Everything you need to know about the assault weapons ban, in one post, By Brad Plumer, WonkBlog, Washington Post, December 17, 2012]

Where this kind of muddle and uncertainty prevail, the proper attitude of the federal government is restraint. General nationwide consensus provides some obvious boundaries on things like hand grenades, howitzers, and nukes. Leave the fine details to the states. Borrowing words from Z-Man again:

On an issue like guns, doing nothing is usually the best course. Most states are sensible on guns, so letting the states handle it is good for us.

My recommendation to the President and the Congress on gun control is therefore: Don’t just do something, sit there.

Endnote: VDARE.com has run two stories about Confederate statues recently. James Fulford reported that a black District Attorney has dropped charges against five people who destroyed the statue of a generic Confederate soldier in Durham, North Carolina. There was no doubt the defendants committed a wanton act of gross vandalism against public property—they filmed the whole thing and put it on YouTube—but … it was a statue of a Confederate soldier, so the courts are fine with it.

Then Jason Kessler reported that a judge has ordered tarps removed that had been covering statues of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson in Charlottesville, Va. following the Antifa riot there last summer.

The Antifa Red Guards have promised to destroy those statues. Quite likely they will find a way to do so sooner or later, happy in the knowledge that if they succeed in doing so, some other supportive judge will make sure they suffer no significant punishment.

This is our Cultural Revolution: lawless anarchists egged on by sympathetic judges from our left-wing law schools.

And somebody wants to take my guns away?

Come and get them, you bastards.

2010-12-24dl[1] John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by VDARE.com com:FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Gun Control, Guns 
Hide 328 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Smart people are saying that the root causes of mass shootings are things like fatherless homes and similar cultural changes.

    The recent Florida shooting appears to have been facilitated by a PC program that prevented that particular fatherless, technically Hispanic shooter from having the criminal record that would have prevented him from buying his gun(s).

    We already have all the gun laws we need, but we are doing everything to prevent ourselves from enforcing them.

    Trump stumbles in mysterious ways, and this latest flub will fade away as all of his do. There will be no elimination of due process just because Donny said something stupid, and that’s all that matters.

    We have precious few “like-minded friends” in or anywhere near positions of power, so “we are doomed” anyway, but why abandon our one-and-only life raft in the meantime?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rbel
    Please stop using the term "shooter" to describe a mass murderer. The term shooter is used by the left to downplay the culpability of the murderer and turn it toward the gun itself. A person target shooting at the range is a shooter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. “1776 will commence again if you try and take our firearms!” Alex Jones to Piers Morgan

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don’t come, we will block the highway!

    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    Read More
    • Agree: European-American
    • Disagree: donut, RadicalCenter, Randal, bluedog
    • Replies: @Lemurmaniac
    we don't need gun control, we just need to ban non-whites from having them and gun violence would drop precipitously
    , @Ok then
    OK!! Thanks NWO grunt. I have never heard arguments that powerful before. Wow!
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed
     
    I’m pretty sure all bullets when fired travel at “high speed.”

    that if you were in a situation like this [bird attack]
     
    You may be shocked to learn that there are things called shotguns that fire a large number of “bullets” (or rather, pellets) at high speed simultaneously. Even Joe Biden approved of such a destructive device.
    , @jacques sheete

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain...
     
    You forgot to add "addiction to bureaucratic control"... It changes the brain as well as the soul.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Let me try my patience again, Jonathan, as this is an opportunity to show you my point from last week. Do you understand what Mr. Derbyshire meant by including "Come and get them, you bastards"? (often phrased "Molon Labe!" by the gun rights people.)?

    The 2nd Amendment was NOT about duck hunting or self-defense, even though Americans are right that these benefits of these tools we call firearms are good ones. What Mr. Derbyshire wrote about just before this was a description of the increasing anarcho-tyranny in this country. That, the increasingly-powerful police state, and the size of the US Feral Gov't, is the reason patriotic Americans have been fighting efforts by people like you to destroy the 2nd Amendment since before you and John Derbyshire were living here, and even before we all on here were born!

    My point last week was that John Derbyshire has been here since the early 1990's (just read the jeep story- fantastic!), while you say you've been in America 1/2 decade > than that. Why haven't you learned a damn thing, Jonathan? Couldn't you pick up anything from a fellow ex-Englishman, or better yet, your Southern* neighbors.

    .
    .

    Maybe you live S. of the I-4, so they may be your Yankee/Cuban neighbors - can't learn much from them, I suppose.

    , @European-American
    Apparently, 25% of Americans own guns. So I presume something like 75% of Americans are like me: don't own guns, don't care much about them one way or another. Call us benighted, it's ok, I'm just talking facts and perceptions here, not what is right and good.

    To be more specific about my own vague feelings about guns, I have used guns a few times and feel they are pretty fun and possibly useful and I like the idea of people having guns in a safe and responsible way. I'd prefer if the US could remain an exception among countries of the world with happily and safely armed citizens.

    However, I honestly don't care much about the issue, so it seems utterly normal for me, after yet another nasty shooting incident, to talk about ways of avoiding such incidents. Why is it so easy for lunatics to buy horribly dangerous weapons, etc. bla, bla bla.

    And yeah these people reacting with "you can take this gun from my cold dead hands" sound hysterical to me. I don't know what Trump said (don't care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.


    Does Trump actually understand words and meanings?
     
    John, I usually like what you say, but here you sound like a nerd to me. I bet Trump understands words and meanings quite well when they are written down in a legal contract. He also understands that when they are just spoken, for example on TV, they have much fuzzier definitions. It's all about emotions. Agreeing with what the last person said is often good politics.

    Again, I admit I don't know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters' views about guns.

    , @Fred on Nothing
    Your schlocky arguments and jewy smears give you away.

    I don't how to tell you this but -- we know.
    We know who and what you are.

    We know that Jews hijacked Russia through subversion and terror, ultimately murdering 60,000,000 unarmed White Gentiles.

    I don't know ANY gun owner who is anti-government. That is one of your emblematic Talmudic lies conjured of whole cloth. Gun owners want lawful, Constitutional government free of the perversions of Jewish subversion and terror.

    I'd be packing my bags if I were you. I hear that Alpha Centauri is nice this time of year.
    , @Stripes Duncan
    "Potentially dangerous"

    Yes well who determines this? At which point does an individual cross this line? Where is the line? Is it an arbitrary standard or will it be applied rigidly? If it is applied rigidly, and it's found to have a "disparate impact," what then?

    When your political ideology is found by (((psychiatry))) to be a symptom of mental illness, will it then follow that you are "potentially dangerous" and need to be disarmed?

    Driving is "potentially dangerous." Opening your front door and crossing the threshold is "potentially dangerous." Life is not a risk-free enterprise. Approach it like a man.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns...
     
    ...or voting. Let's be consistent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. I’d vote for a gay black Muslim over Trump right now

    A threefer– a trio of groups the authors of the Second Amendment would never have let anywhere near a working “firelock”.

    The damage he has done to the cause of gun rights is incalculable and it will not be forgotten

    Huh? Just by free-associating at a press conference? The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

    And NB: I said our gun rights. Who the hell cares about theirs?

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn’t seem like it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @animalogic
    I think you are pretty spot on. The Trump "meeting" was no more than political theater. Agree with the last speaker ? Why not ? It's about perceptions -- as if Trump is going to follow democrat advice ? I mean, hullo ?
    This Z guy seems a bit hysterical: "Unless he eventually signs off on some bold pro-gun laws, lots of his voters will choose to spend the election day at the range come 2020.”
    I guess the key word here is "eventually"... No one is ever satisfied however much they get.
    I like the way Derb' picked up on a key linkage between Neoliberals & the PC crowd : immigration. Cheap labor and
    " virtue". In their own particular ways both sides are selfish, treachous and lacking in (dare I say it ?) wisdom.
    , @Joe Franklin

    The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

     

    Gotta ask.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    My understanding of the 14th is that it imposed all of the BoR restrictions on the federal government in the constitution, including the 2nd amendment, onto the state governments.

    The 14th guarantees that the state governments can't infringe gun rights too.

    Birth right citizenship is a threat to gun rights, especially as it applies to anchor babies born to illegal alien parents who are inclusive to at least one of the federal protected class groups.

    All federal protected class groups of people are generally leftist and anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

    It's questionable if the 14th protects babies born to illegal aliens in the US.
    , @International Jew

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn’t seem like it.
     
    Whatever Z-Man is, I had no opinion of him going into this, but after the handful of items Derb has now told me about him, I'm left scratching my head wondering why Derb holds him in such esteem.

    But I'll head on over to Z-Man's blog and give him a chance, only because I respect Derb.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Trump is playing a dangerous and stupid game in an election year.

    The lefties aren’t going to remember his gun control rhetoric come November, but his base will.

    We voted for and need a leader not a weather vane.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Look...

    guns are good in the hands of sane and moral people

    but

    guns are hell on earth in the hands of insane people.


    There is something really sick about our culture. Too many kids grow up crazy.

    We need to oppose gun bans, but we need more gun control.

    If US didn't have so many sickos, we could have laxer gun laws. But we are not living in that kind of America.

    Now, we all know criminals shouldn't buy guns, and there are laws against them purchasing them, which is why they get them illegally.

    But non-criminals can use guns to do crazy things. And our culture of profanity, vulgarity, trashiness, and drugs(legal and illegal) has turned too many people into nuts. Also, young ones are especially confused, and our sick culture gives them no guidance. The elites don't even have the spine to oppose decadent homomania or condemn 'twerking' as ape-like behavior.

    In the past, the gun issue was good people with guns vs criminals with guns.
    Now, it's far more complicated because so many people who do harm with guns are not criminals, and many don't have a criminal record. Rather, they are crazies with dead souls.

    The current pop culture ideal for young girls is The Slut, and the current ideal for young boys is The Thug. Even churches fly homo flags and celebrate fecal penetration as rainbow and praise trannies to get their penises and balls cut to get fake vaginas. Our media are den of lies told by sociopathic propagandists.

    In this crazy world were young ones can easily grow up to be nuts, we need both more gun control and a total culture war on the forces that are murdering young souls. Deads souls will use guns to turn people into dead bodies.

    At any rate, guns should be the last resort anyway. Against tyranny or crime, guns are to be used only when push comes to shove. Guns, even if legally owned, are like insurance. They don't come into play 99.99% of the time.

    The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.
    Since globalist Liberalism is murdering the souls of young people with degeneracy and decadency, the patriotic conservatives must save the souls with healthy and sane culture. That must be the theme. Saving souls from those who would murder souls.
    , @Wally
    The alternative was Hillary.
    , @Inque Yutani
    And this is how the ProgLeft has taken over. They may squabble, but they can circle the wagons behind a moat of atomic level bullshît and agitprop with military precision.

    Our side hits a small bump, and people are ready to vote for Kamala Harris to “send a message”, or just sit the election out (same effect), and do more damage than anything Trump could do if he tried.

    This is Trump doing his art of the deal routine like he’s been doing forever. Sweet feathery Jesus will the midwit gammas on the right clue in already?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    we don’t need gun control, we just need to ban non-whites from having them and gun violence would drop precipitously

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    The guns possessed by non-white gangbangers are seldom legally obtained, so its an exercise in futility.
    , @International Jew
    Well, that'll never happen. But it's remarkable that the huge amount of coverage the seventeen victims of the Parkland school shooting got, compared to the amount of coverage we've had of the last seventeen victims of run-of-the-mill ghetto violence, fairly screams out that "black lives don't matter".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Cruz would have been in jail or a detention center if not for the fake statistics that must be generated for Hispanic and Black students to show that they are “succeeding.” If you want to know why you need an assault rifle (which is nothing more than a hunting rifle with a large magazine or clip) is readily apparent from the trial runs that Obama and his Marxist friends have already generated: ST. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago to name a few.

    What did the government do? Nothing! They let them plunder, pillage and burn the city. People who know nothing about this type of stuff think that they will get into shooting match with these Antifa type thugs. Think again! They will firebomb you and your family. You’ll need a weapon that can deliver a lot of shots in a short period of time. Furthermore, you need a high speed bullet that takes them out with one shot and also a military type round which is easy to get.

    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight. They want you guns. What they don’t realize is that a handful of military skilled snipers in an urban environment can take down a ton of them and they won’t even know where the shots are coming from. They think what’s being done in S. Africa will be the norm here. The citizens of this nation in the 1700′s had the same muskets and guns as most of the military so it’s only fitting that we too have “equal” gun rights (how’s that for all this equality bs).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth



    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight.
     
    According to Big Derb, and the POTUS himself, this is Trump and the Right! I'm not understanding here, Big Chief, explain this to me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Ok then says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    OK!! Thanks NWO grunt. I have never heard arguments that powerful before. Wow!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Don't feed the trolls, noob.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    I’m for more gun control. What I oppose is gun bans.

    It’s a tricky problem because those who call for gun control eventually want to ban guns.

    The real issue isn’t dead school kids. It’s that Jewish elites fear white gentiles with lots of assault rifles. Notice how these anti-gun people fixate far more on assault rifles than on handguns when, in fact, many many more die of handguns. Why the fixation on rifles? Because an insurrection or resistance to government tyranny is effective with rifles, not with handguns. These Jews who oppose guns in the US are totally okay with gun ownership in Israel because, over there, majority Jews use guns to protect themselves against Palestinians. Power of gun-ownership always favors the majority over the minority. The majority simply have more guns. But if Israel were majority Arab, Jews would certainly be worried about all those Arabs with guns. Jews would prefer for the Jewish-run state to monopolize gun power… like Hussein kept gun power among the Sunni military and police.

    Jews are trying to use school shootings as excuse to ban rifles.

    For this reason, Jews promote the soul-murder of young people through drugs, sex, degeneracy, and broken families. Such problems will lead to more dead souls, and some of these dead souls will use guns in the worst way, as happened in Florida.

    This is why pro-gun people must do two things.

    1. Go for strict gun control so that it will be more difficult for young people to buy guns. And ban stuff like bump stocks. 21 as minimum age for gun purchase isn’t a bad idea. If you gotta be 21 to drink, why not to shoot?

    Maybe military age should also be raised to 21. Should people still in their teens be trained to shoot and kill? Imagine you’re 18 and serving in military and shooting people dead halfway around the world. Shouldn’t one be more mature before becoming a soldier with such lethal power?

    2. Wage culture war on forces that murder the souls of young people. Our pop culture is truly demented and degenerate. And the fads are disgusting. Imagine being a child in the 21st century and your father is some grubby goon with tattoos all over his body. And your mother is a skank with an ass tattoo. And they watch trash TV as culture filled with vulgarity and profanity. It’s soul-murder. Our pop culture is collective child abuse for kids across America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    These are all good points for 2020, or sooner.
    , @davidgmillsatty
    In the case of tyranny, don't you think the rest of the world would be happily obliged to arm American resistance? I could see China and Russia arming us the way we did the Afghans when Russia attacked them. We would get armed in a hurry and with far more useful weapons, like shoulder fired missiles and advanced electronics warfare. The argument against tyranny just doesn't hold much water anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. utu says:

    You want the 4D chess move? He should take guns away from Dreamers first? Will alt-right defend Dreamers right to the 2nd Amendment?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Might need a constitutional amendment for that one Bro.
    , @freebird
    If Dreamers become citizens yes --- they aren't citizens dufus
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Sandy Berger's Socks
    Trump is playing a dangerous and stupid game in an election year.

    The lefties aren't going to remember his gun control rhetoric come November, but his base will.

    We voted for and need a leader not a weather vane.

    Look…

    guns are good in the hands of sane and moral people

    but

    guns are hell on earth in the hands of insane people.

    There is something really sick about our culture. Too many kids grow up crazy.

    We need to oppose gun bans, but we need more gun control.

    If US didn’t have so many sickos, we could have laxer gun laws. But we are not living in that kind of America.

    Now, we all know criminals shouldn’t buy guns, and there are laws against them purchasing them, which is why they get them illegally.

    But non-criminals can use guns to do crazy things. And our culture of profanity, vulgarity, trashiness, and drugs(legal and illegal) has turned too many people into nuts. Also, young ones are especially confused, and our sick culture gives them no guidance. The elites don’t even have the spine to oppose decadent homomania or condemn ‘twerking’ as ape-like behavior.

    In the past, the gun issue was good people with guns vs criminals with guns.
    Now, it’s far more complicated because so many people who do harm with guns are not criminals, and many don’t have a criminal record. Rather, they are crazies with dead souls.

    The current pop culture ideal for young girls is The Slut, and the current ideal for young boys is The Thug. Even churches fly homo flags and celebrate fecal penetration as rainbow and praise trannies to get their penises and balls cut to get fake vaginas. Our media are den of lies told by sociopathic propagandists.

    In this crazy world were young ones can easily grow up to be nuts, we need both more gun control and a total culture war on the forces that are murdering young souls. Deads souls will use guns to turn people into dead bodies.

    At any rate, guns should be the last resort anyway. Against tyranny or crime, guns are to be used only when push comes to shove. Guns, even if legally owned, are like insurance. They don’t come into play 99.99% of the time.

    The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.
    Since globalist Liberalism is murdering the souls of young people with degeneracy and decadency, the patriotic conservatives must save the souls with healthy and sane culture. That must be the theme. Saving souls from those who would murder souls.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stripes Duncan
    "The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America."

    Did you miss the part where the Feds used bayonets to integrate schools in the South?

    It's a myth that the left won it's culture war simply with words and ideas. In truth it had the full might and power of the US government behind it. If you don't educate the blacks/sell houses to immigrants/bake a cake for two poofters, the government will KILL YOU. First you get a warning. If you fail to heed the warning, you get a fine. If you ignore the fine, you will be imprisoned. If you resist imprisonment, they will kill you.

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We're not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    When Trump spoke of Muslim attacks and terror, he lucked out because some happened during his campaign.

    Now that school shootings are in the news, Trump has to be careful. If he just goes on as business-as-usual and if another shooting like this happens, it can hurt him bad.

    We live in a soul-sick society. We have to address that fact. We have to admit that there are too many crazy people on drugs, and they can do horrible things with guns.

    It’s no longer about good people with legal guns vs bad criminals with illegal guns.

    It’s too often about good people with legal guns vs crazy people with legal guns.

    We must work harder to keep legal guns out of the hands of crazy people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Wally says:
    @Sandy Berger's Socks
    Trump is playing a dangerous and stupid game in an election year.

    The lefties aren't going to remember his gun control rhetoric come November, but his base will.

    We voted for and need a leader not a weather vane.

    The alternative was Hillary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. WhiteWolf says:

    He was playing a stupid and dangerous game according to a lot of people during the 2016 election campaign. Now he’s the president.

    Trump isn’t up for re-election this year. The people who are don’t have to agree with Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. I have the idea that in the USA civilians own more guns than there are inhabitants.
    Then, the country has quite a lot of criminal violence, and hunting is quite common.
    Borders are pretty open to the north and to the south, drugs smuggling cannot be prevented.
    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.
    So how one thinks how to create a USA without civilians owning arms, and ammunition, I’m curious how to to this.

    Guns were very difficult to get in the Netherlands, since the EU open borders kalashnikovs are the usual weapons in gang wars.
    Easy to transport from former Yougoslavia.
    Journalists had little trouble of buying one in Brussels for € 150.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.
     
    I think you mean prohibition.

    Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, which is interesting, because many of them got rich, first, from slavery!

    Anyway, "abolition" is another misapplied term because slavery was never abolished in the land of the free.

    Here's a summary of the idea.:

    “But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage.”

    - Leo Tolstoy
    A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7
     
    Americans have long been debt, wage and tax slaves but few possess the minimal clarity of thought to understand the concept, and those who do are powerless to do much about it.

    "He who has the gold has the power." And he who takes your gold takes your power whether you agree or not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. “What is “a well-regulated militia””?

    John, John, John… a well regulated militia is a militia of the people (all inclusive) as opposed to a more specific historical American militia, for instance when the City of Philadelphia used to keep an armory to provision that city’s citizens with arms in the event of necessity. BTW, that armory was where the cannons were kept, so, yeah, ‘regulating the militia’ had to do with making certain the people with the keys to the armory would hesitate to turn those cannons on the populace. If your neighbors are liable to shoot you for taking armed stance on the side of the state in a widespread circumstance of civil disobedience, the presumption would be one should hesitate to employ those cannons. The 2nd Amendment’s language is not vague at all when contextualized with other, related, portions of the document:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. whoa! It’s not all for naught as usual what is revealed is that democrats are simply going to dismiss protections when it comes to their agendas. For all of their apoplectic fits about the Bill of Rights — when push comes to shove they are more than happy to brush aside something as vital as “due process” .
    I don’t expect Mr Trump to be up to snuff on the constitution, most Presidents are not – even supposed constitutional lawyers. Their legal advisers usually address those issues. The fact that it was for all to see is buttressed against democratic lack of response — fortunately – that looms larger.

    What I appreciate about Pres trump is that we are getting a good look at how the democrats operate and more than likely, most Republicans as well – sadly.

    Allow me to extend my congratulations to all of those who hopped on the Patriot act and HMS band wagon and the subsequent surveillance and security protocols. What should have been temporary measures after 9/11 have become important government tools of convenience. Those of us who said “huh?” No way! Unnecessary!!

    Called unpatriotic, “panzies”, “cowards”, “gay” and an assorted lists and acts of humiliation for actually thinking through the implications — can relish in the

    “I told you so’s” with a clear conscience. Conservatism, took a long flight after 9/11 and for those us who stayed on the ground — we can only grind our teeth as machine eats its young.

    That is a very bizarre video exchange.

    Some pe

    Read More
    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Dump him!
    He turned out way bigger liar than the nobelized one he replaced.
    But his BS was appealing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Some people think there are grey areas about the 2nd Amendment. I don’t. People are allowed to own, house, and use weapons. The second amendment notes one reason for said ownership. It does not bar ownership. Just because it doesn’t cite the myriad reasons one might own a weapon is not cause for banning ownership.

    Despite engaging in ill advised open forums, (though I get the Pres. desire to appear open) and despite his own comments, is not an indication that he has damaged weapons ownership in the least.

    What the NRA should be careful is responding to extremely traumatizing events where weapons are used by suggesting everyone should carry one — even in the classroom. Not because it’s a bad idea, b ut ignores the obvious trauma and makes the NRA appear obtuse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. anon • Disclaimer says:

    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots. Same with academia. The media, and the cultural narrative it creates, is the current against which every conservative must swim, and even the strongest swimmers lose ground every year. Nixon understood this, but failed to do anything about it. Nationalize the media and set the current flowing in the other direction.

    Now, how do you get the courts, the congress and public to go along with this program when the media is telling them that it’s the most evil idea ever? “A free press is an essential ingredient of democracy Goys! And, what’s more free than having it monopolized by a dozen billionaire Jews*?” However you convince them, it must be done because it’s an essential component of the West saving itself: If the West saves itself, this will happen.

    * And a few dull, cowardly, zero noblesse oblige Gentiles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots.
     
    Except that he's not a patriot, but a "Trumpiot" and that rhymes with "idiot."

    Pathetic that's the best we could do, and it was.

    , @Anon
    Conservatives should have raised their kids since the 60s to take over media, academia, and government, but too many of them were into 'muh guns' and 'muh NFL tickets'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Reg Cæsar

    I’d vote for a gay black Muslim over Trump right now
     
    A threefer-- a trio of groups the authors of the Second Amendment would never have let anywhere near a working "firelock".

    The damage he has done to the cause of gun rights is incalculable and it will not be forgotten
     
    Huh? Just by free-associating at a press conference? The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

    And NB: I said our gun rights. Who the hell cares about theirs?

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn't seem like it.

    I think you are pretty spot on. The Trump “meeting” was no more than political theater. Agree with the last speaker ? Why not ? It’s about perceptions — as if Trump is going to follow democrat advice ? I mean, hullo ?
    This Z guy seems a bit hysterical: “Unless he eventually signs off on some bold pro-gun laws, lots of his voters will choose to spend the election day at the range come 2020.”
    I guess the key word here is “eventually”… No one is ever satisfied however much they get.
    I like the way Derb’ picked up on a key linkage between Neoliberals & the PC crowd : immigration. Cheap labor and
    ” virtue”. In their own particular ways both sides are selfish, treachous and lacking in (dare I say it ?) wisdom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Randal says:

    My recommendation to the President and the Congress on gun control is therefore: Don’t just do something, sit there.

    This is the only sensible approach.

    Experience teaches that this line can be held in the US most of the time, but there are periodic danger points following particularly big crimes when gun controllers are emboldened to try to exploit the inevitable emotional response to win what they cannot gain by ordinary, reasoned politics. At those times, the problem is that politicians tend to get nervous about their seats and fear that if they don’t compromise they will be portrayed as heartless and will lose sufficient votes to lose them.

    The good news is that to date the US (unlike many other countries in the US sphere) has proven able to weather such dangerous pressure points. The trick is to hold the line until the sentimental charge is reduced by familiarity, giving only meaningless sympathy during the danger period while turning attention to the other factors that always exist in such shootings (as they always will because guns do not kill people). And the benefit of having repeatedly done so successfully is that the gun grabbers do get disheartened – they will never give up so long as they think there might be a chance of getting what they want for deeply held basically irrational personal reasons usually unrelated to the pretext arguments they put forward openly, but they do temporarily give up and move onto other issues if they believe there is no hope of immediate “progress”.

    The very worst thing to do is to give them hope of any movement whatsoever in the direction they want. Doing so just reinvigorates their campaigning ardour and runs the risk of a snowballing emotionally manipulative effect developing. In effect, it is like showing weakness to a scavenging predator. This is the worst aspect of the seeming mistake Trump made on this occasion.

    The counter argument would be that Trump has no great difficulty in reversing past positions taken for tactical or rhetorical purposes and it might be that his performance served to deflect immediate criticism of him for “inaction” until the danger period is passed. The only real way to know, with someone as mercurial and inconsistent as Trump, is to wait and see what actual actions follow, rather than paying too much attention to the words.

    But this is surely a situation in which his words alone were, in themselves, at the least highly dangerous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. Randal says:

    It may not be too much of a stretch to say that Trump lost his party the 2018 midterms with this meeting.

    The saddest part of that is that the best way to help Trump do the right thing would be to elect staunchly pro-gun, anti-immigration, anti-interventionist politicians to try to make the legislative side do their job.

    The answer. I guess, is that politicians of our age are terminally timid, when they’re not actually corrupt and just dancing to their donors’ tunes.

    So should we just yield to despair? Well, not entirely. It’s possible, though, that someone less useless than Trump will have learned the lesson of 2016: that even in this age of suffocating, stultifying Political Correctness, there is a hunger for a bold and direct approach to our nation’s problems. Let’s nurse that hope for 2020.

    Well one problem is that if he’s genuinely patriotic enough to be useful, your side will probably call him antisemitic and the soppy antiracist wing (let’s call them the “American Conservative” branch) will call him racist as well. Meanwhile the establishment “right” will call him both and keep on more or less openly collaborating with the political left as they always have done.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed

    I’m pretty sure all bullets when fired travel at “high speed.”

    that if you were in a situation like this [bird attack]

    You may be shocked to learn that there are things called shotguns that fire a large number of “bullets” (or rather, pellets) at high speed simultaneously. Even Joe Biden approved of such a destructive device.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. “Look, I’m not saying that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, please don’t take offense. ”

    Damn, John. You sound like Trump or one of those GOP cucks in Congress. Try this:

    “Look, all I’m saying is that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, kiss my ass and go get a real job.”

    See? That sounds like a man with at least one testicle.

    Read More
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • LOL: Truth
    • Replies: @Alden
    Some departments are ok.

    For instance 150 years ago counterfeiting was rampant. The secret service cracked down and its almost non existent. Farmers appreciate the agriculture department. It does all sorts of helpful things.

    FAA makes flying safer than trains and car travel. Social Security administers the only pension system not subject to destruction by corporate raiders and the Wolves of Wall St.

    The crown jewel of the federal government is the national parks and the people who work in them.

    The rest might have some useful function but I can’t think of any right now.

    HUD needs to go. dept of education and EEOC need to go and all present past and employees sent to the gulag. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to go and all present and past employees sent to the gulag.

    I’m sure there are some other useful federal departments but can’t think of any.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. unit472 says:

    I too went Whaaat! when Trump made that remark but I don’t think gun absolutists like Zman or Derbyshire understand what they are up against this time.

    From CNBC-”BlackRock said despite its size it doesn’t see it as “our place” to dictate what a company should do. However, “based on our engagement conversations and our long-term view of the company, we may vote against specific directors or we may vote against management on shareholder proposals.”

    (((Larry Fink’s ))) Blackrock is a $5 TRILLION dollar fund, i.e. it owns 20% of the S&P.

    Facebook’s Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    Trump walked back his dumb comment back but it had a calming effect on public opinion. People understood what he meant. A school teacher or even a concerned citizen should be able to request a restraining order to protect the public from an obvious lunatic even if law enforcement and school superintendents won’t! A hearing could be held and evidence presented. The Virginia Tech gunman, Tucson’s Jared Loughner or Parkland’s Nikolas Cruz could appear and argue they pose no threat to anyone. The judge would decide in the same way a domestic restraining order is issued ( they often aren’t) and due process is observed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    The money goblins actively helped impose homo-ism on the US.

    It will be interesting to see whether gun control is a step too far for them, or not.
    , @jacques sheete

    Facebook’s Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!
     
    It's rotten gefilte fish, in fact.

    A couple of decades ago I spent some time looking up who controls or owns the weapons manufacturers including the ones you mentioned. If enough people knew who and what they were and probably still are, they'd poop loads of gefilte fish.

    Hint: The same crowd that owns/controls the big media and big banks also have done something similar to the arms manufacturers (and truth be known, all other big industry as well).

    Look up the Swope Plan, who was behind it, figure out why, and curse FDR vehemently for being a such a disgusting puppet. No wonder he appeased and smooched Bolshie tuschie.

    Done deal folks.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Century Arms, one of the largest assemblers of military look-a-like firearms in the U.S. (corporate headquarters in Florida, manufacturing facility in Vermont) is privately owned, although I believe the family owning it is Jewish.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. So Derby’s Boomerposting has turned back to his usual blackpill self. Glad he returned to normalcy.

    As for Trump, I think Derby is overthinking it. Trump has no real ideological core. That was obvious to anyone who actually paid attention to his past electoral history. I suppose being “tough on trade” is one of the few consistent things about Trump. He was openly pro-Affirmative Action in the campaign.

    He ditched Bannon when ZOG came down on him like a ton of bricks. Ultimately, I don’t think the gun issue will go anywhere. Not because of Trump, but simply because of the upcoming midterms.

    Trump is the national version of Pete Wilson. The last GOP governor of California. The difference is that Wilson had a brain of his own and had consistency. Trump has neither.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. mcohen says:

    I love a good stook,especially the little pink one’s with wurty brip on top.is a stooker alright and it gets the job done.bing bing bing and it glows.oh so hot……and now from the film “A clockwork orange” this memorable quote

    “Very hard ethical questions are involved,” he went on. “You are to be made into a good boy, 6655321. Never again will you have the desire to commit acts of violence or to offend in any way whatsoever against the State’s Peace. I hope you take all that in. I hope you are absolutely clear in your own mind about that.” (2.3.11)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. I found myself thinking:…This is the Great Negotiator?

    The average 2 year old has better negotiating skills. I admit he’s the best we have, and that says it all.

    MAGA? Hahaha.

    PS: Speaking of 2 year olds, the shape of his mouth reminds me of the “Gerber” baby’s, and his “defiant” demeanor’s consistent as well. The dude’s a pathetic lightweight, and waaay out of his element, but that goes for the rest of the DC goons as well.

    Heaven help us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    Heaven help us.
     
    In the short term you fellows may get that wish, but in the looong term... No! ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain…

    You forgot to add “addiction to bureaucratic control”… It changes the brain as well as the soul.

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier

    You forgot to add “addiction to bureaucratic control”… It changes the brain as well as the soul.
     
    Indeed. The only people who trust our currently constituted government to do the right thing are fools.

    Guns don't kill people, fools do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Dr. X says:

    - Category One: suggestions that are just plainly unconstitutional and will be struck down by the courts.

    The suggestion our President extruded on Wednesday falls into Category One: “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”

    Derb is right that such an action is “plainly unconstitutional,” but he is WRONG in thinking that they will be struck down by the courts.

    Courts are staffed with left-wing ideologues, and so far they have failed to strike ANY of the “plainly unconstitutional” gun control laws in Derb’s own home state of New York (not to mention Connecticut, Massachusetts, and California).

    In fact, Derb, who holds a New York State handgun ownership permit, ought to know that the policy in New York has been “take the guns first, due process second” for over a century. Any and all registered handguns in New York can be confiscated on the spot for any reason or perceived reason. Get arrested for so much as a DUI? Hand ‘em over immediately, before you go to court. Even if you win in court or get the charges dropped you’re not guaranteed to get your guns back.

    And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.

    You MUST always assume that ANY leverage that the government has over your guns will ALWAYS be used to maximum effect to disarm as many people as possible.

    King Cuomo must have been wetting himself like an excited puppy to hear Trump talk like that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    All true Doc, but I would hope (and never would ask) that he's got guns that are not known about. That's why even the instant background-check system is way too onerous for lots of us. Anyone who knows anything about computers/software knows that the data on your check is not just "gone". There is no such thing as it being gone.

    People in charge of it won't admit it, but NICS is a low-level registration system, or at least a look-back type. You'll only hear about it when it's time for it to start being regularly used for this purpose.

    The cntrl-left keeps pushing and pushing. Most are useful idiots for the cause, like some, ahem, I've heard from lately, but the ones on the top know how this is supposed to end. I think they're mistaken this time.

    Regarding my last paragraph, promotion of handguns for self-defense has been a great thing for enlightening the young people. The fact that many people need guns for this reason is not a good thing in and of itself, but they may come around to understanding the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment a lot quicker as they respect guns, are not wetting their panties about them, and hang around with the older crowd how have the guns for reasons of "Feral Gov't" and "Never Again".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Randal says:
    @unit472
    I too went Whaaat! when Trump made that remark but I don't think gun absolutists like Zman or Derbyshire understand what they are up against this time.

    From CNBC-"BlackRock said despite its size it doesn't see it as "our place" to dictate what a company should do. However, "based on our engagement conversations and our long-term view of the company, we may vote against specific directors or we may vote against management on shareholder proposals."

    (((Larry Fink's ))) Blackrock is a $5 TRILLION dollar fund, i.e. it owns 20% of the S&P.

    Facebook's Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    Trump walked back his dumb comment back but it had a calming effect on public opinion. People understood what he meant. A school teacher or even a concerned citizen should be able to request a restraining order to protect the public from an obvious lunatic even if law enforcement and school superintendents won't! A hearing could be held and evidence presented. The Virginia Tech gunman, Tucson's Jared Loughner or Parkland's Nikolas Cruz could appear and argue they pose no threat to anyone. The judge would decide in the same way a domestic restraining order is issued ( they often aren't) and due process is observed.

    The money goblins actively helped impose homo-ism on the US.

    It will be interesting to see whether gun control is a step too far for them, or not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    He ditched Bannon when ZOG came down on him like a ton of bricks.

    True, actually what appears to really have done Bannon in is when the media, like Saturday Night Live, started saying Bannon was smarter than Trump, and “really in charge” and that he deserved the credit for winning the campaign. (As they did with Cheney and Rove to Bush)

    As the media probably knew, Trump hated seeing Bannon get the credit, and pettily, stupidly fired him. It’s really a pathetic joke that he’s such a petty man that the media manipulated him into firing the best person in his administration.

    If the media really wanted to get rid of Stephen Miller, all they’d have to do is have an SNL skit where Miller walks in and bosses Trump around, “Miller sits in the big boy chair” and Trump goes to the corner and plays with tinker toys. He’d fire Miller the next day: “No one gets credit but me!”

    Imbecile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them now to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    And that's why the US easily won the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, because it outguned the native population 100-1.....oh wait!
    , @Dr. X

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want.
     
    That's simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That's why the Founders envisioned "well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias" -- to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is "up in arms." The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.
     
    That's true, but only if they isolate and target individuals and pick them off one-by-one. They can't do that to everybody, so the plan is to 1) make examples out of a few people, and 2) shut down the commercial sale and manufacture of guns and ammo and put a chokehold on the retail availability of guns rather than do a mass confiscation.
    , @peterAUS
    No.
    Can elaborate, up to a point on "open" Internet.

    Hint:
    Those pilots, tank and sub commanders have families and friends.
    Those live among the "targeted population".
    Targeting tends to work both ways.

    Custom load 7.62 NATO, 30-03, 8x57, .303, 7.62×54, bolt action, accurized, optics, adjustable stock and trigger. Hand held ballistic computer, laser rangefinder. Just......one........shot.

    Like this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_70
    Or even this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1903_Springfield
    , @Twodees Partain
    "As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far)"

    Nope, gun owning citizens outnumber cops and the military by well over 100 to 1. You just showed everyone participating here that you're a shill and that you're probably swapping spit with that Mason clown. You just made my ignore list.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    Let me try my patience again, Jonathan, as this is an opportunity to show you my point from last week. Do you understand what Mr. Derbyshire meant by including “Come and get them, you bastards”? (often phrased “Molon Labe!” by the gun rights people.)?

    The 2nd Amendment was NOT about duck hunting or self-defense, even though Americans are right that these benefits of these tools we call firearms are good ones. What Mr. Derbyshire wrote about just before this was a description of the increasing anarcho-tyranny in this country. That, the increasingly-powerful police state, and the size of the US Feral Gov’t, is the reason patriotic Americans have been fighting efforts by people like you to destroy the 2nd Amendment since before you and John Derbyshire were living here, and even before we all on here were born!

    My point last week was that John Derbyshire has been here since the early 1990′s (just read the jeep story- fantastic!), while you say you’ve been in America 1/2 decade > than that. Why haven’t you learned a damn thing, Jonathan? Couldn’t you pick up anything from a fellow ex-Englishman, or better yet, your Southern* neighbors.

    .
    .

    Maybe you live S. of the I-4, so they may be your Yankee/Cuban neighbors – can’t learn much from them, I suppose.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.
    , @Twodees Partain
    Don't feed the trolls. This Mason imbecile would have given up and wandered off weeks ago if people here had been able to restrain themselves from flapping their meat at him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. pyrrhus says:
    @Lemurmaniac
    we don't need gun control, we just need to ban non-whites from having them and gun violence would drop precipitously

    The guns possessed by non-white gangbangers are seldom legally obtained, so its an exercise in futility.

    Read More
    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Truth
    What about the ones possessed by white gangbangers?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. pyrrhus says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them now to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they're getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they'll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    And that’s why the US easily won the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, because it outguned the native population 100-1…..oh wait!

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Hmmmm . . .


    not home ownership, but on the battlefield in nearly every engagement (major battle) that is correct, And that is why they finally signed the peace agreement. Because the US was not going to leave without one.

    Let's skip the "we lost Vietnam" nonsense. The reason the North invaded and started a second war was because the US left. And we left on our own accord.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Dr. X says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them now to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they're getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they'll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    That’s true, but only if they isolate and target individuals and pick them off one-by-one. They can’t do that to everybody, so the plan is to 1) make examples out of a few people, and 2) shut down the commercial sale and manufacture of guns and ammo and put a chokehold on the retail availability of guns rather than do a mass confiscation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. "

    I disagree completely; "ordnance" is a very important element; "organization" cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    And the Framers of our constitution would probably also disagree with you, because it is the right to possess "hardware", not "organization", that the second amendment is all about.

    Moreover, the historical record shows that our masters have been engaged in a methodical, long term effort to disarm us. They seek to generally diminish our ability to resist/fight back while enhancing their own ability.

    An example is the "Hughes amendment" (1986) which effectively prohibits the average person from legally possessing fully automatic weapons. This amendment was not a legislative response to an automatic-weapon-fueled crime wave; rather, it was an agenda driven infringement that came out of the clear blue sky.

    Another example is the ban on armor piercing ammunition. The "government" has access to both level 4 body armor and effective armor piercing (AP) ammo (e.g., M995, M993 tungsten-carbide-cored ammo), but "the people" are not allowed to have any ammo with a tungsten carbide core.

    Our masters have also made repeated attempts to ban body armor (only for "the people" of course). Although AFAIK they haven't been successful yet, they keep trying.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn't something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It's something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    It's clear that "public safety" has nothing to with the long-standing effort to disarm us.
    , @peterAUS
    Rare "practical" comment related to this subject.

    The heart of the matter:

    It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people.
     
    Couldn't agree more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Joe Hide says:

    How could the author and others miss the 1000′s Of arrests of pedophile traffickers and murderous pyschopath elitists under Trump? Is this a forbidden topic? Gitmo is filling up with traitors. The Globalists, NWO’ers, and deep state are not only carrying out mis-information attacks constantly via the controlled media, they have also carried out assassination attempts on GOP leaders (….as in playing baseball and a large truck parked in front of an Amtrac train). How can political authors miss this and get distracted by President Trump’s seemingly unintelligible speech? Think about it, He and his Allies want the extremely wealthy and powerful (
    ..But arrogant) Deep State to be mislead as to his and their true Agenda. I like Unz.com, but is it intentionally only covering relatively “Soft Topics”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. @Dr. X

    - Category One: suggestions that are just plainly unconstitutional and will be struck down by the courts.

    The suggestion our President extruded on Wednesday falls into Category One: “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”
     
    Derb is right that such an action is "plainly unconstitutional," but he is WRONG in thinking that they will be struck down by the courts.

    Courts are staffed with left-wing ideologues, and so far they have failed to strike ANY of the "plainly unconstitutional" gun control laws in Derb's own home state of New York (not to mention Connecticut, Massachusetts, and California).

    In fact, Derb, who holds a New York State handgun ownership permit, ought to know that the policy in New York has been "take the guns first, due process second" for over a century. Any and all registered handguns in New York can be confiscated on the spot for any reason or perceived reason. Get arrested for so much as a DUI? Hand 'em over immediately, before you go to court. Even if you win in court or get the charges dropped you're not guaranteed to get your guns back.

    And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.

    You MUST always assume that ANY leverage that the government has over your guns will ALWAYS be used to maximum effect to disarm as many people as possible.

    King Cuomo must have been wetting himself like an excited puppy to hear Trump talk like that.

    All true Doc, but I would hope (and never would ask) that he’s got guns that are not known about. That’s why even the instant background-check system is way too onerous for lots of us. Anyone who knows anything about computers/software knows that the data on your check is not just “gone”. There is no such thing as it being gone.

    People in charge of it won’t admit it, but NICS is a low-level registration system, or at least a look-back type. You’ll only hear about it when it’s time for it to start being regularly used for this purpose.

    The cntrl-left keeps pushing and pushing. Most are useful idiots for the cause, like some, ahem, I’ve heard from lately, but the ones on the top know how this is supposed to end. I think they’re mistaken this time.

    Regarding my last paragraph, promotion of handguns for self-defense has been a great thing for enlightening the young people. The fact that many people need guns for this reason is not a good thing in and of itself, but they may come around to understanding the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment a lot quicker as they respect guns, are not wetting their panties about them, and hang around with the older crowd how have the guns for reasons of “Feral Gov’t” and “Never Again”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JMcG
    I have a friend whose house was broken into some years ago. He had some guns stolen. The cops who came to investigate had a list of every gun he’d bought through an FFL going back to the 80’s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    Apparently, 25% of Americans own guns. So I presume something like 75% of Americans are like me: don’t own guns, don’t care much about them one way or another. Call us benighted, it’s ok, I’m just talking facts and perceptions here, not what is right and good.

    To be more specific about my own vague feelings about guns, I have used guns a few times and feel they are pretty fun and possibly useful and I like the idea of people having guns in a safe and responsible way. I’d prefer if the US could remain an exception among countries of the world with happily and safely armed citizens.

    However, I honestly don’t care much about the issue, so it seems utterly normal for me, after yet another nasty shooting incident, to talk about ways of avoiding such incidents. Why is it so easy for lunatics to buy horribly dangerous weapons, etc. bla, bla bla.

    And yeah these people reacting with “you can take this gun from my cold dead hands” sound hysterical to me. I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.

    Does Trump actually understand words and meanings?

    John, I usually like what you say, but here you sound like a nerd to me. I bet Trump understands words and meanings quite well when they are written down in a legal contract. He also understands that when they are just spoken, for example on TV, they have much fuzzier definitions. It’s all about emotions. Agreeing with what the last person said is often good politics.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    " I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people."

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it's not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in "retaliation" for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration . For me the number one issue for me is who controls our foreign policy esp. in regard to the ME . He promised us America and Americans first . His actions seem to indicate that he as almost every other pol. puts Israel first .
    As for the nutcases it's a manifestation of "behavioral sink", playing whack-a-mole is not a solution .
    , @Twodees Partain
    " I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns."

    I doubt that. Even the mewling little queers in California are divided on the subject of firearms and have an opinion on the subject. If you usually like what Mason says, you belong at Huffpo, not here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Achmed E. Newman
    Let me try my patience again, Jonathan, as this is an opportunity to show you my point from last week. Do you understand what Mr. Derbyshire meant by including "Come and get them, you bastards"? (often phrased "Molon Labe!" by the gun rights people.)?

    The 2nd Amendment was NOT about duck hunting or self-defense, even though Americans are right that these benefits of these tools we call firearms are good ones. What Mr. Derbyshire wrote about just before this was a description of the increasing anarcho-tyranny in this country. That, the increasingly-powerful police state, and the size of the US Feral Gov't, is the reason patriotic Americans have been fighting efforts by people like you to destroy the 2nd Amendment since before you and John Derbyshire were living here, and even before we all on here were born!

    My point last week was that John Derbyshire has been here since the early 1990's (just read the jeep story- fantastic!), while you say you've been in America 1/2 decade > than that. Why haven't you learned a damn thing, Jonathan? Couldn't you pick up anything from a fellow ex-Englishman, or better yet, your Southern* neighbors.

    .
    .

    Maybe you live S. of the I-4, so they may be your Yankee/Cuban neighbors - can't learn much from them, I suppose.

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I've heard this crap from you for a week running, Mason. I guess you never heard about the whole damn police force of Los Angeles looking for one ex-cop for, was it 4 days?, a few years back. He wasn't necessarily a good shot even, being a cop and non-white guy.

    Ever heard of the Viet Cong, the Moslems we used to be buddy-buddy with in Afghanistan in the early 1980's, or 100's of other cases of BIG GOV and BIG MIL getting slowly whipped by the little guy? It's all over the internet, this stuff. It may be that you are still stuck in that old TV mode. Do watch CSI-Miami, Jonathan and really believe that these crack agents with their quick thinking and hands on all the data in the world are reality? I knew TV was bullshit during One Day at a Time (glorifying single-motherhood) and Maude (glorifying, ugly feminist broads, I guess?) , when I was a wee one.

    Get off the TV, Mason. Maybe it's the Jason Bourne ____ ty/cy/um movies that make you believe this hype that our FERAL GOV is omnipotent and omniscient. Think again, again, and again, mujumbo!
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    ... as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.
     
    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn't know about - "Trotsky and Lenin" (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), "red guards and capitalist roaders" (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and "thought police and proles".

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.
    , @peterAUS
    You aren't much coherent here.

    Had the act of Timothy McVeigh created general uprising of people of that county, currently armed, the situation would've been unmanageable for US Government.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer
     
    Haha....oh, yes....that.
    You just slipped "old boy". That's the lingo used by "leftards" all around the world for military personnel.
    "Trained killer". What a load of bollocks. He was a member of simple regular (mechanized) infantry.

    I agree that most of people into the 2nd are of that "play soldiers", but, takes just a spark, a tipping point, to shift from playing a soldier in real militiaman.
    Humans are....complicated....creatures. Nobody has solved that "will", "mindset" thing. More you push people, more most of them fold. But, it, sometimes, comes that undefined point when a person stops folding. And, should he/she has means of resistance, everything changes.
    A firearm, in the eternal game of power between humans, is that means.

    TPTB just feel, and they are smart, that just maybe, that tipping point is being reached for "flyover" states. Trump election pointed there.
    So..........go for those means.
    Take them away.

    I know that an average "leftard" can't get that.
    But, some other people can and. Those that count.
    , @El Dato

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.
     
    (Swish motions made with the hand implied)

    I thought his head became messed up by Janet Reno burning down Branch Davidians in Waco?

    Gore Vidal writing in Vanity Fair, in times that gave off the feeling of an incubating zombie outbreak (i.e. September 2001, thus written in August or earlier):

    Although McVeigh was soon to indicate that he had acted in retaliation for what had happened at Waco (he had even picked the second anniversary of the slaughter, April 19, for his act of retribution), our government’s secret police, together with its allies in the Media, put, as it were, a heavy fist upon the scales. There was to be only one story: one man of incredible innate evil wanted to destroy innocent lives for no reason other than a spontaneous joy in evildoing. From the beginning, it was ordained that McVeigh was to have no coherent motive for what he had done other than a Shakespearean motiveless malignity. Iago is now back in town, with a bomb, not a handkerchief. More to the point, he and the prosecution agreed that he had no serious accomplices.

    I sat on an uncomfortable chair, facing a camera. Generators hummed amid the delphiniums. Good Morning America was first. I had been told that Diane Sawyer would be questioning me from New York, but ABC has a McVeigh “expert,” one Charles Gibson, and he would do the honors. Our interview would be something like four minutes. Yes, I was to be interviewed In Depth. This means that only every other question starts with “Now, tell us, briefly . . . ” Dutifully, I told, briefly, how it was that McVeigh, whom I had never met, happened to invite me to be one of the five chosen witnesses to his execution.

    Briefly, it all began in the November 1998 issue of Vanity Fair. I had written a piece about “the shredding of our Bill of Rights.” I cited examples of I.R.S. seizures of property without due process of law, warrantless raids and murders committed against innocent people by various drug-enforcement groups, government collusion with agribusiness’s successful attempts to drive small farmers out of business, and so on. (For those who would like further evidence of a government running amok, turn to page 397 of my The Last Empire.) Then, as a coda, I discussed the illegal but unpunished murders at Ruby Ridge, Idaho (a mother and child and dog had been killed in cold blood by the F.B.I.); then, the next year, Waco. The Media expressed little outrage in either case. Apparently, the trigger words had not been spoken. Trigger words? Remember The Manchurian Candidate? George Axelrod’s splendid 1962 film, where the brainwashed (by North Koreans) protagonist can only be set in murderous motion when the gracious garden-club lady, played by Angela Lansbury, says, “Why don’t you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?”
     
    OT, but he continues with...

    Evidence, however, is overwhelming that there was a plot involving militia types and government infiltrators—who knows?—as prime movers to create panic in order to get Clinton to sign that infamous Anti-Terrorism Act. But if, as it now appears, there were many interested parties involved, a sort of unified-field theory is never apt to be found, but should there be one, Joel Dyer may be its Einstein. (Einstein, of course, never got his field quite together, either.) In 1998, I discussed Dyer’s Harvest of Rage in these pages. Dyer was editor of the Boulder Weekly. He writes on the crisis of rural America due to the decline of the family farm, which also coincided with the formation of various militias and religious cults, some dangerous, some merely sad. In Harvest of Rage, Dyer made the case that McVeigh and Terry Nichols could not have acted alone in the Oklahoma City bombing. Now he has, after long investigation, written an epilogue to the trials of the two co-conspirators. Herewith, some of his startling findings.
     
    etc.

    Someone called Peter Lance also says there is a connection to the Qaeda team here, I don't know what to make of this:

    "A growing body of circumstantial evidence suggests that Ramzi Yousef may have designed the Oklahoma City device for Terry Nichols when he was in Cebu, Philippines, in 1994–95. Nichols’s passport shows four trips to the Philippines since 1990; Edwin Angeles , a former leader of the Abu Sayyaf terror group, swears to police that Nichols, aka “The Farmer,” met Yousef in the Philippines in the early 1990s. Passport records show that on November 3, 1994, Wali Khan Amin Shah and Ramzi Yousef applied for Philippines visas while in Singapore. On November 4, Terry Nichols applied for his Philippines visa in Chicago. The most curious circumstantial evidence comes from Michael Fortier, the government’s star witness in U.S. v. Timothy McVeigh. Fortier swears under oath that the only ammonium nitrate–fuel oil device McVeigh ever built was a dud. Then, after Nichols was in Cebu City at the same time as Ramzi Yousef , Nichols and McVeigh built the 5,600-pound ammonium nitrate–nitromethane bomb that destroyed the Murrah Building."
     
    , @Fred on Nothing
    McVeigh's participation in the OKC bombing is murky. But anyone with access to sea level oxygen knows that it was a Mossad op.

    By all means, keep squirming and prevaricating. I can do this all day, my lubricious little Hasbara rodent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Let’s see, taking the official story at face value, Cruz illegally went into a school armed with a rifle, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the “fun” of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a soda at Subway.

    Trump illegally went into Syria armed with cruise missiles, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the “fun” of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a nice piece of cake.

    Small world.

    At first glance, it would seem that Orange Clown = Cruz = Charles Manson = the Zodiac Killer, etc.; from a moral perspective at least.

    But here’s the thing: Our constitution intended to ARM “the people” and DISARM the president, i.e., prevent him from being able to start a war on his own initiative.

    If we are to have “liberty and freedom” – which I thought America was supposed to be all about – it is understood by reasonable people that it will come at the cost of an occasional “lone nut” who drives his car while intoxicated (and kills people), for example, or an occasional “lone nut” (real or imagined) who shoots his gun while deranged (and kills people).

    The Framers of our constitution were not stupid people; of course they understood that crimes would be committed with guns by a small fraction of “the people”, but what could they do about it? Nothing, since “liberty and freedom” is a package deal. You want “liberty and freedom”? Then you have to put up with the inevitable down side that the same “liberty and freedom” also empowers deranged people.

    In other words, we don’t give up our cars because some small fraction of “the people” drive while intoxicated, and we don’t give up our guns because some small fraction of the people shoot while deranged.

    On the other hand, in contrast to Cruz, Charles Manson, etc., the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional acts of the murderous Orange Clown are not only completely antithetical to the concept of “liberty and freedom”, but they have the potential to destroy America and potentially wipe out life on earth.

    The Framers of our constitution clearly sought to prevent one man, “the president”, from being able to start wars on his own initiative. It is not only breathtakingly immoral but completely diametrically opposed to the constitution and the founding principles to allow “the president” to go all over the world invading countries, murdering people with missiles, etc., making threats, etc., as Orange Clown routinely does.

    As I type this, Orange Clown is recklessly bitch-slapping nuclear armed Russia and China around just like he’s bitch-slapping the constitution and his “supporters” around; and there are some signs that Russia is getting sick and tired of all the provocations.

    Thanks to the Satanic machinations of Orange Clown (and his handlers and enablers), the average American is probably much more likely to die in a nuclear war with Russia and/or China than from a bullet fired from the gun of a “lone nut”.

    So here we are, possibly just one more impulsive-reckless-illegal-immoral-unconstitutional-completely-unnecessary-pointless-cruise-missile-attack-by-Orange-Clown away from planetary extinction, but in the interest of “public safety”, we really need to further infringe the second amendment?

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Priorities, man. PRIORITIES!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.

    This sounds somewhat similar to the child abuse reporting laws here in Florida except for the part about guns, so probably it only applies where the health care givers are professionally involved with the case rather than a general power to diagnose people who post on this blog under fake names.

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of ‘red flag’ law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of ‘red flag’ law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.
     
    You sure would! Lucky for us you are not in charge of a damn thing. Princeton Communism could really use a guy like you, Joel Jonathan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    Your schlocky arguments and jewy smears give you away.

    I don’t how to tell you this but — we know.
    We know who and what you are.

    We know that Jews hijacked Russia through subversion and terror, ultimately murdering 60,000,000 unarmed White Gentiles.

    I don’t know ANY gun owner who is anti-government. That is one of your emblematic Talmudic lies conjured of whole cloth. Gun owners want lawful, Constitutional government free of the perversions of Jewish subversion and terror.

    I’d be packing my bags if I were you. I hear that Alpha Centauri is nice this time of year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Jonathan Mason

    And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.
     
    This sounds somewhat similar to the child abuse reporting laws here in Florida except for the part about guns, so probably it only applies where the health care givers are professionally involved with the case rather than a general power to diagnose people who post on this blog under fake names.

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of 'red flag' law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of ‘red flag’ law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.

    You sure would! Lucky for us you are not in charge of a damn thing. Princeton Communism could really use a guy like you, Joel Jonathan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Dr. X

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want.
     
    That's simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That's why the Founders envisioned "well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias" -- to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is "up in arms." The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.
     
    That's true, but only if they isolate and target individuals and pick them off one-by-one. They can't do that to everybody, so the plan is to 1) make examples out of a few people, and 2) shut down the commercial sale and manufacture of guns and ammo and put a chokehold on the retail availability of guns rather than do a mass confiscation.

    “That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. ”

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    And the Framers of our constitution would probably also disagree with you, because it is the right to possess “hardware”, not “organization”, that the second amendment is all about.

    Moreover, the historical record shows that our masters have been engaged in a methodical, long term effort to disarm us. They seek to generally diminish our ability to resist/fight back while enhancing their own ability.

    An example is the “Hughes amendment” (1986) which effectively prohibits the average person from legally possessing fully automatic weapons. This amendment was not a legislative response to an automatic-weapon-fueled crime wave; rather, it was an agenda driven infringement that came out of the clear blue sky.

    Another example is the ban on armor piercing ammunition. The “government” has access to both level 4 body armor and effective armor piercing (AP) ammo (e.g., M995, M993 tungsten-carbide-cored ammo), but “the people” are not allowed to have any ammo with a tungsten carbide core.

    Our masters have also made repeated attempts to ban body armor (only for “the people” of course). Although AFAIK they haven’t been successful yet, they keep trying.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    It’s clear that “public safety” has nothing to with the long-standing effort to disarm us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dr. X

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is irrelevant; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we're trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    , @peterAUS
    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn't need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well...I do hope that even the most "leftard" idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Reg Cæsar

    I’d vote for a gay black Muslim over Trump right now
     
    A threefer-- a trio of groups the authors of the Second Amendment would never have let anywhere near a working "firelock".

    The damage he has done to the cause of gun rights is incalculable and it will not be forgotten
     
    Huh? Just by free-associating at a press conference? The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

    And NB: I said our gun rights. Who the hell cares about theirs?

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn't seem like it.

    The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

    Gotta ask.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    My understanding of the 14th is that it imposed all of the BoR restrictions on the federal government in the constitution, including the 2nd amendment, onto the state governments.

    The 14th guarantees that the state governments can’t infringe gun rights too.

    Birth right citizenship is a threat to gun rights, especially as it applies to anchor babies born to illegal alien parents who are inclusive to at least one of the federal protected class groups.

    All federal protected class groups of people are generally leftist and anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

    It’s questionable if the 14th protects babies born to illegal aliens in the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    There is no question.


    The fourteenth amendment applies to former slaves and former slaves only. The concept of "anchore babies" is unconstitutional on its face.
    , @Twodees Partain
    You've never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn't "questionable" at all.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

     

    How do you reconcile "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" with "No free negro or mulatto shall be suffered to possess any firelock..."? How do you get equality between a race that must be armed and one that must not?

    This circle may or not be unbroken, but it will always be unsquared.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    I’ve heard this crap from you for a week running, Mason. I guess you never heard about the whole damn police force of Los Angeles looking for one ex-cop for, was it 4 days?, a few years back. He wasn’t necessarily a good shot even, being a cop and non-white guy.

    Ever heard of the Viet Cong, the Moslems we used to be buddy-buddy with in Afghanistan in the early 1980′s, or 100′s of other cases of BIG GOV and BIG MIL getting slowly whipped by the little guy? It’s all over the internet, this stuff. It may be that you are still stuck in that old TV mode. Do watch CSI-Miami, Jonathan and really believe that these crack agents with their quick thinking and hands on all the data in the world are reality? I knew TV was bullshit during One Day at a Time (glorifying single-motherhood) and Maude (glorifying, ugly feminist broads, I guess?) , when I was a wee one.

    Get off the TV, Mason. Maybe it’s the Jason Bourne ____ ty/cy/um movies that make you believe this hype that our FERAL GOV is omnipotent and omniscient. Think again, again, and again, mujumbo!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Truth says:
    @niteranger
    Cruz would have been in jail or a detention center if not for the fake statistics that must be generated for Hispanic and Black students to show that they are "succeeding." If you want to know why you need an assault rifle (which is nothing more than a hunting rifle with a large magazine or clip) is readily apparent from the trial runs that Obama and his Marxist friends have already generated: ST. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago to name a few.

    What did the government do? Nothing! They let them plunder, pillage and burn the city. People who know nothing about this type of stuff think that they will get into shooting match with these Antifa type thugs. Think again! They will firebomb you and your family. You'll need a weapon that can deliver a lot of shots in a short period of time. Furthermore, you need a high speed bullet that takes them out with one shot and also a military type round which is easy to get.

    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight. They want you guns. What they don't realize is that a handful of military skilled snipers in an urban environment can take down a ton of them and they won't even know where the shots are coming from. They think what's being done in S. Africa will be the norm here. The citizens of this nation in the 1700's had the same muskets and guns as most of the military so it's only fitting that we too have "equal" gun rights (how's that for all this equality bs).

    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight.

    According to Big Derb, and the POTUS himself, this is Trump and the Right! I’m not understanding here, Big Chief, explain this to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    What occurred in Florida was tragic. but it is a local, regional and state issue.

    The NRA has no culpability in what occurred.
    , @niteranger
    It's simple Trump is being intimidated by the left. Trump thinks he's smarter than he is. He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail because they now allow unacceptable behavior no matter how sick it is to keep their statistics equal. You never give up the offensive. Attack ..Attack...Attack. The left cannot handle a sustained attack.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    … as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn’t know about – “Trotsky and Lenin” (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), “red guards and capitalist roaders” (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and “thought police and proles”.

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    That's a good one, AEN. I have to post an archaic LOL here because I already used mine.
    , @Truth

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.
     
    Dude, that's even 10x funnier, was this intentional humor or just comic deus ex-machina, like a young Jerry Lewis stumbling and falling down on stage with a guy named Dean Martin scheduled to come on after him?
    , @Anonymous

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.
     
    Dude. SubMinister Manson. MANSON.

    http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/toast/toast.html#bigbro

    The next day I wake up like any party worker, with a vigorous bout of calisthenics supervised via telescreen. Unlike most party members, I have an instructor all to myself and she’s a babe; cute, winsome, and anxious to please. She lets me finish my morning coffee before starting the work-out, and stammers an apology with frightened eyes when I joke about inviting her round for dinner. I find that mildly annoying: it was a joke, dammit, I didn’t mean to scare her. That’s the sort of thing my father might have done.

    After the calisthenics, the propaganda: a new triumph in Mars orbit, our battleship beat their battleship. Chocolate ration to be increased by five grams—strictly irrelevant, I have a purple pass that gets me into the unlimited-quota food hall at Harrods. This week’s NOVA launch from the Bahamas is delayed; unexpected weather conditions will blow the fallout plume from the spaceship back over Florida unless they hold until the weekend. Something about intricate surgery, face transplants for disfigured burn victims, heroes in our war against Eurasia. I keep an ear open for real news but there isn’t any; not a peep about SubMinister Manson’s bid for a seat on the general auditing committee. Or his impending visit to Airstrip One.

    I arrive in the office around ten o’clock and settle into my chair. I slide my hand into my terminal; it reads the print off my left little finger and logs me on. A well-disciplined supervisor brings me more coffee while the office workers on the floor below form up for their three minute hate and weekly team meeting: I watch from behind the mirrorglass balcony window before settling down to a day’s hard work.

    I am a systems manager in the abstract realm of the Computer, the great Party-designed, transistorised, thinking machine that lurks in a bomb-proofed bunker in Docklands. It’s my job to keep the behemoth running: to this end I have wheel authority, access all areas. The year is probably 2018, old calendar, but nobody’s very sure about it any more—too many transcription errors crept in during the 1980’s, back when not even MiniLove was preserving truly accurate records. It’s probably safest just to say that officially this is the Year 99, the pre-centenary of our beloved Big Brother’s birth.

    It’s been the Year 99 for thirty-three months now, and I’m not sure how much longer we can keep it that way without someone in the Directorate noticing. I’m one of the OverStaffCommanders on the year 100 project; it’s my job to help stop various types of chaos breaking out when the clocks roll round and we need to use an extra digit to store dates entered since the birth of our Leader and Teacher.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Truth says:
    @utu
    You want the 4D chess move? He should take guns away from Dreamers first? Will alt-right defend Dreamers right to the 2nd Amendment?

    Might need a constitutional amendment for that one Bro.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Why they aren't citizens. They don't even have green cards.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Might need a constitutional amendment for that one Bro.
     
    Right. Illegal aliens have a right to keep and bear arms on the land they're trespassing upon.

    You've topped yourself this time, Truth.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Truth says:
    @pyrrhus
    The guns possessed by non-white gangbangers are seldom legally obtained, so its an exercise in futility.

    What about the ones possessed by white gangbangers?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The latest evil incarnate clearly identified himself with white supremacists, and he looks pretty pale too, for all to see. But, there is a deceitful narrative (so what else is new) being spun that he was not white at all, because he has a hispanic name… even though that simply means, of Spanish origins. Are the loser Spanish non-white? We also know what saints purebred lily white asses are, right?

    Anyway, who cares. After going through enough racist narratives, I am numbed. All I wish for now is for your kind to also feel the same pain they have caused the other unfortunates around the world. All in the name fairness, you understand.

    Given the hundreds of thousands of non-white babies/children blown up by degenerate palefaces… *shrug*

    All that tells me is that justice is sometimes served in this world too. Just not enough of it, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Gb2RepublicOfKongo and get yourself a supersized serving of good old justice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @jilles dykstra
    I have the idea that in the USA civilians own more guns than there are inhabitants.
    Then, the country has quite a lot of criminal violence, and hunting is quite common.
    Borders are pretty open to the north and to the south, drugs smuggling cannot be prevented.
    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.
    So how one thinks how to create a USA without civilians owning arms, and ammunition, I'm curious how to to this.

    Guns were very difficult to get in the Netherlands, since the EU open borders kalashnikovs are the usual weapons in gang wars.
    Easy to transport from former Yougoslavia.
    Journalists had little trouble of buying one in Brussels for € 150.

    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.

    I think you mean prohibition.

    Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, which is interesting, because many of them got rich, first, from slavery!

    Anyway, “abolition” is another misapplied term because slavery was never abolished in the land of the free.

    Here’s a summary of the idea.:

    “But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage.”

    - Leo Tolstoy
    A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

    Americans have long been debt, wage and tax slaves but few possess the minimal clarity of thought to understand the concept, and those who do are powerless to do much about it.

    “He who has the gold has the power.” And he who takes your gold takes your power whether you agree or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Curle
    “Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, ”

    I think I might agree with you but could you elaborate?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @pyrrhus
    And that's why the US easily won the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, because it outguned the native population 100-1.....oh wait!

    Hmmmm . . .

    not home ownership, but on the battlefield in nearly every engagement (major battle) that is correct, And that is why they finally signed the peace agreement. Because the US was not going to leave without one.

    Let’s skip the “we lost Vietnam” nonsense. The reason the North invaded and started a second war was because the US left. And we left on our own accord.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Joe Franklin

    The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

     

    Gotta ask.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    My understanding of the 14th is that it imposed all of the BoR restrictions on the federal government in the constitution, including the 2nd amendment, onto the state governments.

    The 14th guarantees that the state governments can't infringe gun rights too.

    Birth right citizenship is a threat to gun rights, especially as it applies to anchor babies born to illegal alien parents who are inclusive to at least one of the federal protected class groups.

    All federal protected class groups of people are generally leftist and anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

    It's questionable if the 14th protects babies born to illegal aliens in the US.

    There is no question.

    The fourteenth amendment applies to former slaves and former slaves only. The concept of “anchore babies” is unconstitutional on its face.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @anon
    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots. Same with academia. The media, and the cultural narrative it creates, is the current against which every conservative must swim, and even the strongest swimmers lose ground every year. Nixon understood this, but failed to do anything about it. Nationalize the media and set the current flowing in the other direction.

    Now, how do you get the courts, the congress and public to go along with this program when the media is telling them that it's the most evil idea ever? "A free press is an essential ingredient of democracy Goys! And, what's more free than having it monopolized by a dozen billionaire Jews*?" However you convince them, it must be done because it's an essential component of the West saving itself: If the West saves itself, this will happen.


    * And a few dull, cowardly, zero noblesse oblige Gentiles.

    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots.

    Except that he’s not a patriot, but a “Trumpiot” and that rhymes with “idiot.”

    Pathetic that’s the best we could do, and it was.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Truth



    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight.
     
    According to Big Derb, and the POTUS himself, this is Trump and the Right! I'm not understanding here, Big Chief, explain this to me.

    What occurred in Florida was tragic. but it is a local, regional and state issue.

    The NRA has no culpability in what occurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fred on Nothing
    It is a national problem in that it is Jewish stochastic terror using "entertainment" to infuse the youthful population with nihilism, anger and shoot-em-up ideation.

    School shooting (disarmament) epidemic is a relatively recent phenomenon that has been kicked into high gear as Americans are coming to realize the true perpetrators of 9/11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Dr. X says:
    @Harold Smith
    "That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. "

    I disagree completely; "ordnance" is a very important element; "organization" cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    And the Framers of our constitution would probably also disagree with you, because it is the right to possess "hardware", not "organization", that the second amendment is all about.

    Moreover, the historical record shows that our masters have been engaged in a methodical, long term effort to disarm us. They seek to generally diminish our ability to resist/fight back while enhancing their own ability.

    An example is the "Hughes amendment" (1986) which effectively prohibits the average person from legally possessing fully automatic weapons. This amendment was not a legislative response to an automatic-weapon-fueled crime wave; rather, it was an agenda driven infringement that came out of the clear blue sky.

    Another example is the ban on armor piercing ammunition. The "government" has access to both level 4 body armor and effective armor piercing (AP) ammo (e.g., M995, M993 tungsten-carbide-cored ammo), but "the people" are not allowed to have any ammo with a tungsten carbide core.

    Our masters have also made repeated attempts to ban body armor (only for "the people" of course). Although AFAIK they haven't been successful yet, they keep trying.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn't something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It's something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    It's clear that "public safety" has nothing to with the long-standing effort to disarm us.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is irrelevant; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we’re trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists."

    Your point about "organization" is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be "easily overwhelmed", IMO.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?
    , @peterAUS

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.
     
    Much less.
    Four guys, knowing what they do, with bolts and shotguns can keep that SWAT team at bay.
    12 guys can take them out with ease. If they know what they do.

    5000 organized civilians with Remington 700 hunting rifles, in a proper prepared positions (a week of decent US ingenuity and construction work) can have a mechanized brigade working hard, for a week at least, to break them.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

     

    Disagree.
    five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns. No problem at all. Those soldiers wouldn't be able to get a foothold in a town defended by those 5000 citizens. Of course, organized civilians.
    Add armor and helicopter gunships they will, of course. Add artillery and they'll smash through those citizens in a week. With considerable casualties.
    All irrelevant, actually.
    The political fallout of a town in US Midwest being pummeled into dust with 125 and 155 shells is...well...imaginable!?

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.
     
    Yup.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily "...wiped out by one good shooter armed with a 70 year old Garand in a position in an upper floor window overlooking their AO.

    The confiscation team would have to be rifle company sized, backed by a APC with a Ma Deuce to do more than disarm one household in a neighborhood. A dozen fat donut addicts wearing kevlar would scatter, pissing their pants if only one of their number were shot down while they attempted a home invasion.

    Let me know when that 5,000 man professional army turns up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @unit472
    I too went Whaaat! when Trump made that remark but I don't think gun absolutists like Zman or Derbyshire understand what they are up against this time.

    From CNBC-"BlackRock said despite its size it doesn't see it as "our place" to dictate what a company should do. However, "based on our engagement conversations and our long-term view of the company, we may vote against specific directors or we may vote against management on shareholder proposals."

    (((Larry Fink's ))) Blackrock is a $5 TRILLION dollar fund, i.e. it owns 20% of the S&P.

    Facebook's Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    Trump walked back his dumb comment back but it had a calming effect on public opinion. People understood what he meant. A school teacher or even a concerned citizen should be able to request a restraining order to protect the public from an obvious lunatic even if law enforcement and school superintendents won't! A hearing could be held and evidence presented. The Virginia Tech gunman, Tucson's Jared Loughner or Parkland's Nikolas Cruz could appear and argue they pose no threat to anyone. The judge would decide in the same way a domestic restraining order is issued ( they often aren't) and due process is observed.

    Facebook’s Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    It’s rotten gefilte fish, in fact.

    A couple of decades ago I spent some time looking up who controls or owns the weapons manufacturers including the ones you mentioned. If enough people knew who and what they were and probably still are, they’d poop loads of gefilte fish.

    Hint: The same crowd that owns/controls the big media and big banks also have done something similar to the arms manufacturers (and truth be known, all other big industry as well).

    Look up the Swope Plan, who was behind it, figure out why, and curse FDR vehemently for being a such a disgusting puppet. No wonder he appeased and smooched Bolshie tuschie.

    Done deal folks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @jacques sheete

    I found myself thinking:...This is the Great Negotiator?
     
    The average 2 year old has better negotiating skills. I admit he's the best we have, and that says it all.

    MAGA? Hahaha.

    PS: Speaking of 2 year olds, the shape of his mouth reminds me of the "Gerber" baby's, and his "defiant" demeanor's consistent as well. The dude's a pathetic lightweight, and waaay out of his element, but that goes for the rest of the DC goons as well.

    Heaven help us.

    Heaven help us.

    In the short term you fellows may get that wish, but in the looong term… No! ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Truth says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    ... as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.
     
    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn't know about - "Trotsky and Lenin" (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), "red guards and capitalist roaders" (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and "thought police and proles".

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    That’s a good one, AEN. I have to post an archaic LOL here because I already used mine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Truth says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    ... as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.
     
    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn't know about - "Trotsky and Lenin" (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), "red guards and capitalist roaders" (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and "thought police and proles".

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Dude, that’s even 10x funnier, was this intentional humor or just comic deus ex-machina, like a young Jerry Lewis stumbling and falling down on stage with a guy named Dean Martin scheduled to come on after him?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Probably closer to young Jerry Lewis, or maybe even Jerry Springer, as I don't know what you or Anonymous are referring to. Glad you laughed anyway, Truth.

    My line above is a combination of 1984 and Risky Business*.

    .
    .

    * Though it's not my favorite line in the movie - "OK, who's the U-Boat commander?"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. El Dato says:
    @Anon
    I'm for more gun control. What I oppose is gun bans.

    It's a tricky problem because those who call for gun control eventually want to ban guns.

    The real issue isn't dead school kids. It's that Jewish elites fear white gentiles with lots of assault rifles. Notice how these anti-gun people fixate far more on assault rifles than on handguns when, in fact, many many more die of handguns. Why the fixation on rifles? Because an insurrection or resistance to government tyranny is effective with rifles, not with handguns. These Jews who oppose guns in the US are totally okay with gun ownership in Israel because, over there, majority Jews use guns to protect themselves against Palestinians. Power of gun-ownership always favors the majority over the minority. The majority simply have more guns. But if Israel were majority Arab, Jews would certainly be worried about all those Arabs with guns. Jews would prefer for the Jewish-run state to monopolize gun power... like Hussein kept gun power among the Sunni military and police.

    Jews are trying to use school shootings as excuse to ban rifles.

    For this reason, Jews promote the soul-murder of young people through drugs, sex, degeneracy, and broken families. Such problems will lead to more dead souls, and some of these dead souls will use guns in the worst way, as happened in Florida.

    This is why pro-gun people must do two things.

    1. Go for strict gun control so that it will be more difficult for young people to buy guns. And ban stuff like bump stocks. 21 as minimum age for gun purchase isn't a bad idea. If you gotta be 21 to drink, why not to shoot?

    Maybe military age should also be raised to 21. Should people still in their teens be trained to shoot and kill? Imagine you're 18 and serving in military and shooting people dead halfway around the world. Shouldn't one be more mature before becoming a soldier with such lethal power?

    2. Wage culture war on forces that murder the souls of young people. Our pop culture is truly demented and degenerate. And the fads are disgusting. Imagine being a child in the 21st century and your father is some grubby goon with tattoos all over his body. And your mother is a skank with an ass tattoo. And they watch trash TV as culture filled with vulgarity and profanity. It's soul-murder. Our pop culture is collective child abuse for kids across America.

    These are all good points for 2020, or sooner.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @EliteCommInc.
    What occurred in Florida was tragic. but it is a local, regional and state issue.

    The NRA has no culpability in what occurred.

    It is a national problem in that it is Jewish stochastic terror using “entertainment” to infuse the youthful population with nihilism, anger and shoot-em-up ideation.

    School shooting (disarmament) epidemic is a relatively recent phenomenon that has been kicked into high gear as Americans are coming to realize the true perpetrators of 9/11.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. El Dato says:
    @anonymous
    The latest evil incarnate clearly identified himself with white supremacists, and he looks pretty pale too, for all to see. But, there is a deceitful narrative (so what else is new) being spun that he was not white at all, because he has a hispanic name... even though that simply means, of Spanish origins. Are the loser Spanish non-white? We also know what saints purebred lily white asses are, right?

    Anyway, who cares. After going through enough racist narratives, I am numbed. All I wish for now is for your kind to also feel the same pain they have caused the other unfortunates around the world. All in the name fairness, you understand.

    Given the hundreds of thousands of non-white babies/children blown up by degenerate palefaces... *shrug*

    All that tells me is that justice is sometimes served in this world too. Just not enough of it, though.

    Gb2RepublicOfKongo and get yourself a supersized serving of good old justice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    ... as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.
     
    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn't know about - "Trotsky and Lenin" (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), "red guards and capitalist roaders" (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and "thought police and proles".

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Dude. SubMinister Manson. MANSON.

    http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/toast/toast.html#bigbro

    The next day I wake up like any party worker, with a vigorous bout of calisthenics supervised via telescreen. Unlike most party members, I have an instructor all to myself and she’s a babe; cute, winsome, and anxious to please. She lets me finish my morning coffee before starting the work-out, and stammers an apology with frightened eyes when I joke about inviting her round for dinner. I find that mildly annoying: it was a joke, dammit, I didn’t mean to scare her. That’s the sort of thing my father might have done.

    After the calisthenics, the propaganda: a new triumph in Mars orbit, our battleship beat their battleship. Chocolate ration to be increased by five grams—strictly irrelevant, I have a purple pass that gets me into the unlimited-quota food hall at Harrods. This week’s NOVA launch from the Bahamas is delayed; unexpected weather conditions will blow the fallout plume from the spaceship back over Florida unless they hold until the weekend. Something about intricate surgery, face transplants for disfigured burn victims, heroes in our war against Eurasia. I keep an ear open for real news but there isn’t any; not a peep about SubMinister Manson’s bid for a seat on the general auditing committee. Or his impending visit to Airstrip One.

    I arrive in the office around ten o’clock and settle into my chair. I slide my hand into my terminal; it reads the print off my left little finger and logs me on. A well-disciplined supervisor brings me more coffee while the office workers on the floor below form up for their three minute hate and weekly team meeting: I watch from behind the mirrorglass balcony window before settling down to a day’s hard work.

    I am a systems manager in the abstract realm of the Computer, the great Party-designed, transistorised, thinking machine that lurks in a bomb-proofed bunker in Docklands. It’s my job to keep the behemoth running: to this end I have wheel authority, access all areas. The year is probably 2018, old calendar, but nobody’s very sure about it any more—too many transcription errors crept in during the 1980’s, back when not even MiniLove was preserving truly accurate records. It’s probably safest just to say that officially this is the Year 99, the pre-centenary of our beloved Big Brother’s birth.

    It’s been the Year 99 for thirty-three months now, and I’m not sure how much longer we can keep it that way without someone in the Directorate noticing. I’m one of the OverStaffCommanders on the year 100 project; it’s my job to help stop various types of chaos breaking out when the clocks roll round and we need to use an extra digit to store dates entered since the birth of our Leader and Teacher.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. El Dato says:
    @Harold Smith
    Let's see, taking the official story at face value, Cruz illegally went into a school armed with a rifle, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the "fun" of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a soda at Subway.

    Trump illegally went into Syria armed with cruise missiles, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the "fun" of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a nice piece of cake.

    Small world.

    At first glance, it would seem that Orange Clown = Cruz = Charles Manson = the Zodiac Killer, etc.; from a moral perspective at least.

    But here's the thing: Our constitution intended to ARM "the people" and DISARM the president, i.e., prevent him from being able to start a war on his own initiative.

    If we are to have "liberty and freedom" - which I thought America was supposed to be all about - it is understood by reasonable people that it will come at the cost of an occasional "lone nut" who drives his car while intoxicated (and kills people), for example, or an occasional "lone nut" (real or imagined) who shoots his gun while deranged (and kills people).

    The Framers of our constitution were not stupid people; of course they understood that crimes would be committed with guns by a small fraction of "the people", but what could they do about it? Nothing, since "liberty and freedom" is a package deal. You want "liberty and freedom"? Then you have to put up with the inevitable down side that the same "liberty and freedom" also empowers deranged people.

    In other words, we don't give up our cars because some small fraction of "the people" drive while intoxicated, and we don't give up our guns because some small fraction of the people shoot while deranged.

    On the other hand, in contrast to Cruz, Charles Manson, etc., the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional acts of the murderous Orange Clown are not only completely antithetical to the concept of "liberty and freedom", but they have the potential to destroy America and potentially wipe out life on earth.

    The Framers of our constitution clearly sought to prevent one man, "the president", from being able to start wars on his own initiative. It is not only breathtakingly immoral but completely diametrically opposed to the constitution and the founding principles to allow "the president" to go all over the world invading countries, murdering people with missiles, etc., making threats, etc., as Orange Clown routinely does.

    As I type this, Orange Clown is recklessly bitch-slapping nuclear armed Russia and China around just like he's bitch-slapping the constitution and his "supporters" around; and there are some signs that Russia is getting sick and tired of all the provocations.

    Thanks to the Satanic machinations of Orange Clown (and his handlers and enablers), the average American is probably much more likely to die in a nuclear war with Russia and/or China than from a bullet fired from the gun of a "lone nut".

    So here we are, possibly just one more impulsive-reckless-illegal-immoral-unconstitutional-completely-unnecessary-pointless-cruise-missile-attack-by-Orange-Clown away from planetary extinction, but in the interest of "public safety", we really need to further infringe the second amendment?

    Priorities, man. PRIORITIES!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. peterAUS says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them now to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they're getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they'll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    No.
    Can elaborate, up to a point on “open” Internet.

    Hint:
    Those pilots, tank and sub commanders have families and friends.
    Those live among the “targeted population”.
    Targeting tends to work both ways.

    Custom load 7.62 NATO, 30-03, 8×57, .303, 7.62×54, bolt action, accurized, optics, adjustable stock and trigger. Hand held ballistic computer, laser rangefinder. Just……one……..shot.

    Like this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_70

    Or even this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1903_Springfield

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. peterAUS says:
    @Dr. X

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want.
     
    That's simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That's why the Founders envisioned "well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias" -- to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is "up in arms." The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.
     
    That's true, but only if they isolate and target individuals and pick them off one-by-one. They can't do that to everybody, so the plan is to 1) make examples out of a few people, and 2) shut down the commercial sale and manufacture of guns and ammo and put a chokehold on the retail availability of guns rather than do a mass confiscation.

    Rare “practical” comment related to this subject.

    The heart of the matter:

    It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people.

    Couldn’t agree more.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Curle says:

    Apologies if this is repetitive but,

    Trump just set the House Rs up to be heroes to their base going into the mid-terms AND he showed this sniveling lot that he can administer a whupping for incalcitrants if need be (that’s you Senator Graham).

    As Priebus said, Trump is unusually focused. That includes not permitting distractions to get in the way. We are going to have meaningful immigration controls in this country because of Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. Curle says:
    @jacques sheete

    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.
     
    I think you mean prohibition.

    Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, which is interesting, because many of them got rich, first, from slavery!

    Anyway, "abolition" is another misapplied term because slavery was never abolished in the land of the free.

    Here's a summary of the idea.:

    “But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage.”

    - Leo Tolstoy
    A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7
     
    Americans have long been debt, wage and tax slaves but few possess the minimal clarity of thought to understand the concept, and those who do are powerless to do much about it.

    "He who has the gold has the power." And he who takes your gold takes your power whether you agree or not.

    “Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, ”

    I think I might agree with you but could you elaborate?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete


    “Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, ”
     
    I think I might agree with you but could you elaborate?
     
    Happy to oblige, and sorry for oversimplifying, but "abolition" was a pretext to destroy the South so that the money bag crowd could waltz in and buy up what they wanted for pennies on the dollar. The carpetbagger concept if you will.

    I call it the War of the Northern Bankers Against the Southern Planters, and I'm unaware of any source that could explain it in those terms. Unfortunately I have no time to really develop and explain it further. It just seems to fit the patterns of highly capitalized industrial-state sponsored aggression that I think typify the big wars of the last 2 centuries at least.


    If you're interested, you may want to get a start by reading Thomas DiLorenzo's opinions of Lincoln and the Civil War and Maybe Albert J. Beveridge's impressions too. If you care to develop the concept, I'd be interested in what you find. I find the economics of the war fascinating, but find many other things much more fascinating so I'm far from being well informed on the fine points of that particular topic. Wish I could offer more.

    I'd like to see the South rise again, but good luck with that!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. peterAUS says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    You aren’t much coherent here.

    Had the act of Timothy McVeigh created general uprising of people of that county, currently armed, the situation would’ve been unmanageable for US Government.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer

    Haha….oh, yes….that.
    You just slipped “old boy”. That’s the lingo used by “leftards” all around the world for military personnel.
    “Trained killer”. What a load of bollocks. He was a member of simple regular (mechanized) infantry.

    I agree that most of people into the 2nd are of that “play soldiers”, but, takes just a spark, a tipping point, to shift from playing a soldier in real militiaman.
    Humans are….complicated….creatures. Nobody has solved that “will”, “mindset” thing. More you push people, more most of them fold. But, it, sometimes, comes that undefined point when a person stops folding. And, should he/she has means of resistance, everything changes.
    A firearm, in the eternal game of power between humans, is that means.

    TPTB just feel, and they are smart, that just maybe, that tipping point is being reached for “flyover” states. Trump election pointed there.
    So……….go for those means.
    Take them away.

    I know that an average “leftard” can’t get that.
    But, some other people can and. Those that count.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Dr. X

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is irrelevant; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we're trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    “All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.”

    Your point about “organization” is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be “easily overwhelmed”, IMO.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Your point about “organization” is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be “easily overwhelmed”, IMO.
     
    Simplistic.

    METT-T

    Terrain is the key and, interestingly enough, always kept out of "gun discussions".

    A wooden/brick colonial, 12 vs 12.....SWAT wins all the time.
    A concrete, two story, with a cellar, much harder. Add just 48 hours to prepare, impossible for that SWAT to even get a foothold in one room.
    A compound of several such houses...no way that SWAT would even consider doing that.

    I can go on but then it, will, fast get into "forbidden zone".

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?
     
    Again the very premise of yours is, apparently, the SWAT is going against one guy, or a couple, do a job and then go home.
    An....interesting....viewpoint of.....internal unrest.

    How about that SWAT is just a small member of an organized force going against 30 000 people town which had a general citizen armed unrest. People with just hunting gear.

    That's what Mr X pointed to here and is the crux of the matter.

    Or course that very SWAT can overcome and arrest 5000 people, one by one. One.....by......one.......
    But it can't even one among 5000 working together against that arrest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. KenH says:

    I guess we shouldn’t have expected much from Trump considering he’s always been surrounded by so many Jews and for all intents and purposes is an honorary Jew himself. If it’s too good to be true it usually is and this applies in the case of Trump.

    Trump’s so called centrist solution essentially gives the left about 75% of what they’ve always wanted just like his crap immigration bill which more than doubled amnesty recipients and delays ending chain migration for almost ten years.

    I want a president and not a reality TV moron who likes to create artificial drama and controversy. I don’t want to be entertained I want Trump to keep his promises and advance the agenda he ran on which wasn’t gun control and amnesty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. El Dato says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    (Swish motions made with the hand implied)

    I thought his head became messed up by Janet Reno burning down Branch Davidians in Waco?

    Gore Vidal writing in Vanity Fair, in times that gave off the feeling of an incubating zombie outbreak (i.e. September 2001, thus written in August or earlier):

    Although McVeigh was soon to indicate that he had acted in retaliation for what had happened at Waco (he had even picked the second anniversary of the slaughter, April 19, for his act of retribution), our government’s secret police, together with its allies in the Media, put, as it were, a heavy fist upon the scales. There was to be only one story: one man of incredible innate evil wanted to destroy innocent lives for no reason other than a spontaneous joy in evildoing. From the beginning, it was ordained that McVeigh was to have no coherent motive for what he had done other than a Shakespearean motiveless malignity. Iago is now back in town, with a bomb, not a handkerchief. More to the point, he and the prosecution agreed that he had no serious accomplices.

    I sat on an uncomfortable chair, facing a camera. Generators hummed amid the delphiniums. Good Morning America was first. I had been told that Diane Sawyer would be questioning me from New York, but ABC has a McVeigh “expert,” one Charles Gibson, and he would do the honors. Our interview would be something like four minutes. Yes, I was to be interviewed In Depth. This means that only every other question starts with “Now, tell us, briefly . . . ” Dutifully, I told, briefly, how it was that McVeigh, whom I had never met, happened to invite me to be one of the five chosen witnesses to his execution.

    Briefly, it all began in the November 1998 issue of Vanity Fair. I had written a piece about “the shredding of our Bill of Rights.” I cited examples of I.R.S. seizures of property without due process of law, warrantless raids and murders committed against innocent people by various drug-enforcement groups, government collusion with agribusiness’s successful attempts to drive small farmers out of business, and so on. (For those who would like further evidence of a government running amok, turn to page 397 of my The Last Empire.) Then, as a coda, I discussed the illegal but unpunished murders at Ruby Ridge, Idaho (a mother and child and dog had been killed in cold blood by the F.B.I.); then, the next year, Waco. The Media expressed little outrage in either case. Apparently, the trigger words had not been spoken. Trigger words? Remember The Manchurian Candidate? George Axelrod’s splendid 1962 film, where the brainwashed (by North Koreans) protagonist can only be set in murderous motion when the gracious garden-club lady, played by Angela Lansbury, says, “Why don’t you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?”

    OT, but he continues with…

    Evidence, however, is overwhelming that there was a plot involving militia types and government infiltrators—who knows?—as prime movers to create panic in order to get Clinton to sign that infamous Anti-Terrorism Act. But if, as it now appears, there were many interested parties involved, a sort of unified-field theory is never apt to be found, but should there be one, Joel Dyer may be its Einstein. (Einstein, of course, never got his field quite together, either.) In 1998, I discussed Dyer’s Harvest of Rage in these pages. Dyer was editor of the Boulder Weekly. He writes on the crisis of rural America due to the decline of the family farm, which also coincided with the formation of various militias and religious cults, some dangerous, some merely sad. In Harvest of Rage, Dyer made the case that McVeigh and Terry Nichols could not have acted alone in the Oklahoma City bombing. Now he has, after long investigation, written an epilogue to the trials of the two co-conspirators. Herewith, some of his startling findings.

    etc.

    Someone called Peter Lance also says there is a connection to the Qaeda team here, I don’t know what to make of this:

    “A growing body of circumstantial evidence suggests that Ramzi Yousef may have designed the Oklahoma City device for Terry Nichols when he was in Cebu, Philippines, in 1994–95. Nichols’s passport shows four trips to the Philippines since 1990; Edwin Angeles , a former leader of the Abu Sayyaf terror group, swears to police that Nichols, aka “The Farmer,” met Yousef in the Philippines in the early 1990s. Passport records show that on November 3, 1994, Wali Khan Amin Shah and Ramzi Yousef applied for Philippines visas while in Singapore. On November 4, Terry Nichols applied for his Philippines visa in Chicago. The most curious circumstantial evidence comes from Michael Fortier, the government’s star witness in U.S. v. Timothy McVeigh. Fortier swears under oath that the only ammonium nitrate–fuel oil device McVeigh ever built was a dud. Then, after Nichols was in Cebu City at the same time as Ramzi Yousef , Nichols and McVeigh built the 5,600-pound ammonium nitrate–nitromethane bomb that destroyed the Murrah Building.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    The Murrah building was destroyed by government operatives--NOT McVeigh. Not only were there questionable records and activities going on there, a way was needed to defuse the various "militia movements" that were increasing in popularity due to government abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. There is NO WAY that a "fertilizer bomb" could wreak the destruction that the building sustained. In fact, the glass windows of the "water board building" across the street were untouched. There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which "maintenance people" were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt). Of course, they managed to find the truck's axle, undamaged, not unlike the "passports" found in the rubble of the WTC.
    Look how quickly McVeigh was executed, along with emotional non-testimony being allowed in the "kangaroo court" that was McVeigh's "trial".
    Governments are not averse to using innocent civilians as "pawns", murdering them to achieve a political and social objective.
    Look at the school shootings in which "trained law enforcement" (still) sits on their hands until the shooting stops.
    Par for the course...
    , @Bronson
    Read "Deadly Secrets" by David Paul Hammer. Hammer was on Death Row with McVeigh.

    OK city was a government op - McVeigh, like Oswald, was set up as a patsy - hence the "convenient accident" of Highway Patrol finding him drugged, sitting in a car on the side of the road ... with machine guns in his trunk. McVeigh was perfect - he LOOKED the part of a neo-Nazi - the perfect guy to pin the crime on, and pump up COINTELPRO funding.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    "That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. "

    I disagree completely; "ordnance" is a very important element; "organization" cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    And the Framers of our constitution would probably also disagree with you, because it is the right to possess "hardware", not "organization", that the second amendment is all about.

    Moreover, the historical record shows that our masters have been engaged in a methodical, long term effort to disarm us. They seek to generally diminish our ability to resist/fight back while enhancing their own ability.

    An example is the "Hughes amendment" (1986) which effectively prohibits the average person from legally possessing fully automatic weapons. This amendment was not a legislative response to an automatic-weapon-fueled crime wave; rather, it was an agenda driven infringement that came out of the clear blue sky.

    Another example is the ban on armor piercing ammunition. The "government" has access to both level 4 body armor and effective armor piercing (AP) ammo (e.g., M995, M993 tungsten-carbide-cored ammo), but "the people" are not allowed to have any ammo with a tungsten carbide core.

    Our masters have also made repeated attempts to ban body armor (only for "the people" of course). Although AFAIK they haven't been successful yet, they keep trying.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn't something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It's something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    It's clear that "public safety" has nothing to with the long-standing effort to disarm us.

    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn’t need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well…I do hope that even the most “leftard” idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Ghouta-nya-nya.

    But would it work if there are no third-party players like the US/Saudi Arabia shipping in crates of weapons?

    , @anarchyst
    “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt . . .”
    – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
    , @Harold Smith
    "Your comment is simplistic."

    Well of course it is; a simple truth can usually be expressed by a simple statement.

    "Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease."

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter. You don't make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard. Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    The "war" would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don't have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Truth



    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight.
     
    According to Big Derb, and the POTUS himself, this is Trump and the Right! I'm not understanding here, Big Chief, explain this to me.

    It’s simple Trump is being intimidated by the left. Trump thinks he’s smarter than he is. He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail because they now allow unacceptable behavior no matter how sick it is to keep their statistics equal. You never give up the offensive. Attack ..Attack…Attack. The left cannot handle a sustained attack.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    It's now obvious that Trump is actually a member of the left. He also has delusions of adequacy. I've often told his fans that they need to prepare themselves for the possibility that he's a total mongoloid. I hope they've prepared themselves, because the evidence has just been made public.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. El Dato says:
    @peterAUS
    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn't need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well...I do hope that even the most "leftard" idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.

    Ghouta-nya-nya.

    But would it work if there are no third-party players like the US/Saudi Arabia shipping in crates of weapons?

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    If...if I got your comment right you are comparing current town operations in Syria with similar scenarios in USA?

    As I said, it's politically, so, practically, impossible scenario.

    The key is to force the Government to use a heavy hand, hence it can not.

    So, yes, against any police effort and against any light military effort, an average town in Midwest can do well, no problem at all.

    It can not do well against heavy government push.
    Besides, even if Government does order that, would the troops do it? Not do it...but do it well?
    Not Generals and Colonels, they probably will...hell even Majors. But Captains, and the most important, squad leaders. Squad leaders are the key in this game. Would they lead their squads in heavy house to house fighting Falluja style?
    I just don't think so.

    Do I make sense here?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. peterAUS says:
    @Dr. X

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is irrelevant; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we're trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    Much less.
    Four guys, knowing what they do, with bolts and shotguns can keep that SWAT team at bay.
    12 guys can take them out with ease. If they know what they do.

    5000 organized civilians with Remington 700 hunting rifles, in a proper prepared positions (a week of decent US ingenuity and construction work) can have a mechanized brigade working hard, for a week at least, to break them.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    Disagree.
    five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns. No problem at all. Those soldiers wouldn’t be able to get a foothold in a town defended by those 5000 citizens. Of course, organized civilians.
    Add armor and helicopter gunships they will, of course. Add artillery and they’ll smash through those citizens in a week. With considerable casualties.
    All irrelevant, actually.
    The political fallout of a town in US Midwest being pummeled into dust with 125 and 155 shells is…well…imaginable!?

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    Yup.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    Let's not forget the millions of us veterans out there who have been trained both in firearms and small-unit tactics.
    Definitely a formidable force, if the need arises.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. anarchyst says:
    @peterAUS
    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn't need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well...I do hope that even the most "leftard" idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.

    “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt . . .”
    – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Jonathan Mason
    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours--this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    McVeigh’s participation in the OKC bombing is murky. But anyone with access to sea level oxygen knows that it was a Mossad op.

    By all means, keep squirming and prevaricating. I can do this all day, my lubricious little Hasbara rodent.

    Read More
    • Agree: anarchyst
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Ok then
    OK!! Thanks NWO grunt. I have never heard arguments that powerful before. Wow!

    Don’t feed the trolls, noob.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. anarchyst says:
    @El Dato

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.
     
    (Swish motions made with the hand implied)

    I thought his head became messed up by Janet Reno burning down Branch Davidians in Waco?

    Gore Vidal writing in Vanity Fair, in times that gave off the feeling of an incubating zombie outbreak (i.e. September 2001, thus written in August or earlier):

    Although McVeigh was soon to indicate that he had acted in retaliation for what had happened at Waco (he had even picked the second anniversary of the slaughter, April 19, for his act of retribution), our government’s secret police, together with its allies in the Media, put, as it were, a heavy fist upon the scales. There was to be only one story: one man of incredible innate evil wanted to destroy innocent lives for no reason other than a spontaneous joy in evildoing. From the beginning, it was ordained that McVeigh was to have no coherent motive for what he had done other than a Shakespearean motiveless malignity. Iago is now back in town, with a bomb, not a handkerchief. More to the point, he and the prosecution agreed that he had no serious accomplices.

    I sat on an uncomfortable chair, facing a camera. Generators hummed amid the delphiniums. Good Morning America was first. I had been told that Diane Sawyer would be questioning me from New York, but ABC has a McVeigh “expert,” one Charles Gibson, and he would do the honors. Our interview would be something like four minutes. Yes, I was to be interviewed In Depth. This means that only every other question starts with “Now, tell us, briefly . . . ” Dutifully, I told, briefly, how it was that McVeigh, whom I had never met, happened to invite me to be one of the five chosen witnesses to his execution.

    Briefly, it all began in the November 1998 issue of Vanity Fair. I had written a piece about “the shredding of our Bill of Rights.” I cited examples of I.R.S. seizures of property without due process of law, warrantless raids and murders committed against innocent people by various drug-enforcement groups, government collusion with agribusiness’s successful attempts to drive small farmers out of business, and so on. (For those who would like further evidence of a government running amok, turn to page 397 of my The Last Empire.) Then, as a coda, I discussed the illegal but unpunished murders at Ruby Ridge, Idaho (a mother and child and dog had been killed in cold blood by the F.B.I.); then, the next year, Waco. The Media expressed little outrage in either case. Apparently, the trigger words had not been spoken. Trigger words? Remember The Manchurian Candidate? George Axelrod’s splendid 1962 film, where the brainwashed (by North Koreans) protagonist can only be set in murderous motion when the gracious garden-club lady, played by Angela Lansbury, says, “Why don’t you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?”
     
    OT, but he continues with...

    Evidence, however, is overwhelming that there was a plot involving militia types and government infiltrators—who knows?—as prime movers to create panic in order to get Clinton to sign that infamous Anti-Terrorism Act. But if, as it now appears, there were many interested parties involved, a sort of unified-field theory is never apt to be found, but should there be one, Joel Dyer may be its Einstein. (Einstein, of course, never got his field quite together, either.) In 1998, I discussed Dyer’s Harvest of Rage in these pages. Dyer was editor of the Boulder Weekly. He writes on the crisis of rural America due to the decline of the family farm, which also coincided with the formation of various militias and religious cults, some dangerous, some merely sad. In Harvest of Rage, Dyer made the case that McVeigh and Terry Nichols could not have acted alone in the Oklahoma City bombing. Now he has, after long investigation, written an epilogue to the trials of the two co-conspirators. Herewith, some of his startling findings.
     
    etc.

    Someone called Peter Lance also says there is a connection to the Qaeda team here, I don't know what to make of this:

    "A growing body of circumstantial evidence suggests that Ramzi Yousef may have designed the Oklahoma City device for Terry Nichols when he was in Cebu, Philippines, in 1994–95. Nichols’s passport shows four trips to the Philippines since 1990; Edwin Angeles , a former leader of the Abu Sayyaf terror group, swears to police that Nichols, aka “The Farmer,” met Yousef in the Philippines in the early 1990s. Passport records show that on November 3, 1994, Wali Khan Amin Shah and Ramzi Yousef applied for Philippines visas while in Singapore. On November 4, Terry Nichols applied for his Philippines visa in Chicago. The most curious circumstantial evidence comes from Michael Fortier, the government’s star witness in U.S. v. Timothy McVeigh. Fortier swears under oath that the only ammonium nitrate–fuel oil device McVeigh ever built was a dud. Then, after Nichols was in Cebu City at the same time as Ramzi Yousef , Nichols and McVeigh built the 5,600-pound ammonium nitrate–nitromethane bomb that destroyed the Murrah Building."
     

    The Murrah building was destroyed by government operatives–NOT McVeigh. Not only were there questionable records and activities going on there, a way was needed to defuse the various “militia movements” that were increasing in popularity due to government abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained. In fact, the glass windows of the “water board building” across the street were untouched. There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt). Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.
    Look how quickly McVeigh was executed, along with emotional non-testimony being allowed in the “kangaroo court” that was McVeigh’s “trial”.
    Governments are not averse to using innocent civilians as “pawns”, murdering them to achieve a political and social objective.
    Look at the school shootings in which “trained law enforcement” (still) sits on their hands until the shooting stops.
    Par for the course…

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained.
     
    I completely disagree. It's just a standard compound used in mining & construction. Makes a big hole.

    Actually it was used in the first attack on the WTC (1997), too. Wrecked the parking garage.


    There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt).
     
    That's the first time I have ever heard of that, and I have seen some stuff (what about the "sudden suicide" of the guy who looked like John Doe 2 in the holding cell?). You sure this isn't the WTC meme being backported in time? Really, you just need one guy, not a maintenance team; this isn't precision work. Like in the that X-Files movie, where the bomb is rolled into the FBI building inside an apparently functional vending machine (I suppose this was a clin d'oeuil to the OKC bombing).

    Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.
     
    This must be "ironic". Of course you will find the axle, it's not an antimatter bomb.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained

     

    The citizens of Bath, Michigan, will politely disagree:

    https://www.biography.com/people/andrew-kehoe-235986

    http://daggy.name/tbsd/wreckage.gif

    https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/05/cb/fb/30/mi-bath-school-disaster.jpg


    https://media.clickondetroit.com/photo/2016/05/16/1280px-Bath_School_Disaster_Victims_1463413679188_4295517_ver1.0_640_360.jpg

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. donut says:
    @European-American
    Apparently, 25% of Americans own guns. So I presume something like 75% of Americans are like me: don't own guns, don't care much about them one way or another. Call us benighted, it's ok, I'm just talking facts and perceptions here, not what is right and good.

    To be more specific about my own vague feelings about guns, I have used guns a few times and feel they are pretty fun and possibly useful and I like the idea of people having guns in a safe and responsible way. I'd prefer if the US could remain an exception among countries of the world with happily and safely armed citizens.

    However, I honestly don't care much about the issue, so it seems utterly normal for me, after yet another nasty shooting incident, to talk about ways of avoiding such incidents. Why is it so easy for lunatics to buy horribly dangerous weapons, etc. bla, bla bla.

    And yeah these people reacting with "you can take this gun from my cold dead hands" sound hysterical to me. I don't know what Trump said (don't care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.


    Does Trump actually understand words and meanings?
     
    John, I usually like what you say, but here you sound like a nerd to me. I bet Trump understands words and meanings quite well when they are written down in a legal contract. He also understands that when they are just spoken, for example on TV, they have much fuzzier definitions. It's all about emotions. Agreeing with what the last person said is often good politics.

    Again, I admit I don't know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters' views about guns.

    ” I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.”

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it’s not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in “retaliation” for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration . For me the number one issue for me is who controls our foreign policy esp. in regard to the ME . He promised us America and Americans first . His actions seem to indicate that he as almost every other pol. puts Israel first .
    As for the nutcases it’s a manifestation of “behavioral sink”, playing whack-a-mole is not a solution .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    Exactly; I couldn't have said it better myself. That one war crime in Syria, by itself, where Orange Clown showed the world that he was willing to risk WW3 for the sake of the jewish-supremacist agenda in the Mideast, should've been enough to convince anyone that he's just another anti-American traitor.
    , @European-American
    I agree the Syrian attack was deeply disappointing. And I wish he would cut back on US military action all over the world, as he promised. But Rome wasn’t built in a day, and politics is messy. And I’ve come to realize Trump won’t do all the things I’d like him to do, nor even most of them.

    I still am happy he was elected instead of Clinton. Aren’t you?

    I may be naive, but I still give Trump the benefit of the doubt, and I don’t see anyone I’d rather have for the next term. I wish there was someone better, but for now I’ll settle for him over almost any Democrat or Republican likely to be elected.
    , @Intelligent Dasein

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it’s not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in “retaliation” for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration.
     
    Amen to that. The attack on Syria caused me to lose all heart for Trump the man. We need better candidates to help consolidate the nascent nationalist movement he tapped into to help propel his improbable presidential run.

    On the specific issue of gun control and mass shootings, I only have a couple of things I wish to add. The reason why these shootings continue to happen in America, the reason why they are attended with the same tiresome hand-wringing and "what is to be done" platitudes time after time, and the reason why they pass from the headlines in less than a week, is because such acts are reflections of ourselves. American culture is all about toxic individuality, sensational media circuses, fame by any means, splashy personalities, and about never being "dissed." America is a playground for sociopathic extroverts and a hellhole for anybody who wishes to live a dignified, contemplative, and quiet life. All the talk about making the shootings stop is nothing but pro forma moral posturing. Nobody really gives a rip that another schoolroom or concert crowd gets blown away every couple of months, and they certainly do not care enough to be willing to amend some of the fundamental contributing causes within the culture.

    To discuss this subject as if it had anything to do with gun control or with the psychiatric imprisonment of the disturbed is to completely miss the point. We've created a world devoid of value and beauty. Personally, I am not of the opinion that a raucous, drunken mob, gyrating and twerking away in a gambling den to the loathsome noise that we call music, or a throng of fantasists pressed into a movie theater on the opening night of the latest Batman installment, represents anything that needs to be preserved or defended. Are these "innocent" people living meaningful lives? No; they are ghastly spectacles populated by subhuman beasts. I could not possibly care what happens to them, not because I am a cruel and sadistic person, but because there is inherently nothing there to care about.

    The difference in the spiritual makeup between the person who forms such a mob and the person who shoots it up, it is very much less than what the media's treatments of the subject would have us believe. We are supposed to consider the shooter as a deranged misfit or a psychological cripple, looking only to him as the sole cause of the "tragedy," and the only debate we are allowed to have is about whether it is the gun or the gunner who must be locked away for our protection. What we ought to be asking is, Why are these raunchy concerts and violent cinematic hallucinations allowed to exist in the midst of us? Why are our children warehoused in horrible public schools where barbarities are perpetrated on a daily basis, and the only punishment doled out is to those who dare to speak the truth or defend themselves? There are countless, perfectly legal means by which to abort a child, betray a spouse, or game a living out of the system, but the lives of revelers and their freedom to party unmolested are supposedly sacrosanct?

    There is no consistency in this attitude, save the consistency that the individual's right to endless pleasure-seeking with no consequences must be upheld come what may. It is pointless to decry the existence of shootings and bombings under such circumstances, as we have long since dissolved the standards that would cause men to expect civilized behavior from one another. In the future things will only get worse. The individual slaughters will become rarer, but they will be replaced by mob-on-mob clashes devoid of any semblance of a motivating ideal, occasioned by nothing more than football matches and comicon conventions; and this will be accepted as normal. It is ever in thus manner that high history winds itself up.

    The task before us now is not to figure out how to return to decency, for that it is impossible. It is to figure out how the rare few who possess genuine inwardness and religiosity can preserve themselves, outlast this age, and make their landfall in the future.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    "All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists."

    Your point about "organization" is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be "easily overwhelmed", IMO.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?

    Your point about “organization” is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be “easily overwhelmed”, IMO.

    Simplistic.

    METT-T

    Terrain is the key and, interestingly enough, always kept out of “gun discussions”.

    A wooden/brick colonial, 12 vs 12…..SWAT wins all the time.
    A concrete, two story, with a cellar, much harder. Add just 48 hours to prepare, impossible for that SWAT to even get a foothold in one room.
    A compound of several such houses…no way that SWAT would even consider doing that.

    I can go on but then it, will, fast get into “forbidden zone”.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?

    Again the very premise of yours is, apparently, the SWAT is going against one guy, or a couple, do a job and then go home.
    An….interesting….viewpoint of…..internal unrest.

    How about that SWAT is just a small member of an organized force going against 30 000 people town which had a general citizen armed unrest. People with just hunting gear.

    That’s what Mr X pointed to here and is the crux of the matter.

    Or course that very SWAT can overcome and arrest 5000 people, one by one. One…..by……one…….
    But it can’t even one among 5000 working together against that arrest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots. Same with academia. The media, and the cultural narrative it creates, is the current against which every conservative must swim, and even the strongest swimmers lose ground every year. Nixon understood this, but failed to do anything about it. Nationalize the media and set the current flowing in the other direction.

    Now, how do you get the courts, the congress and public to go along with this program when the media is telling them that it's the most evil idea ever? "A free press is an essential ingredient of democracy Goys! And, what's more free than having it monopolized by a dozen billionaire Jews*?" However you convince them, it must be done because it's an essential component of the West saving itself: If the West saves itself, this will happen.


    * And a few dull, cowardly, zero noblesse oblige Gentiles.

    Conservatives should have raised their kids since the 60s to take over media, academia, and government, but too many of them were into ‘muh guns’ and ‘muh NFL tickets’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. anarchyst says:
    @peterAUS

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.
     
    Much less.
    Four guys, knowing what they do, with bolts and shotguns can keep that SWAT team at bay.
    12 guys can take them out with ease. If they know what they do.

    5000 organized civilians with Remington 700 hunting rifles, in a proper prepared positions (a week of decent US ingenuity and construction work) can have a mechanized brigade working hard, for a week at least, to break them.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

     

    Disagree.
    five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns. No problem at all. Those soldiers wouldn't be able to get a foothold in a town defended by those 5000 citizens. Of course, organized civilians.
    Add armor and helicopter gunships they will, of course. Add artillery and they'll smash through those citizens in a week. With considerable casualties.
    All irrelevant, actually.
    The political fallout of a town in US Midwest being pummeled into dust with 125 and 155 shells is...well...imaginable!?

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.
     
    Yup.

    Let’s not forget the millions of us veterans out there who have been trained both in firearms and small-unit tactics.
    Definitely a formidable force, if the need arises.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    The problem with these discussions is, well, we can't go all the way into the subject on the open Internet.
    Just can't, and, well, shouldn't.

    Bottom line, in a simple settlement, just several families, with most people on the same wavelength, that 12 member SWAT team simply has no chance of success. The best case scenario for them, should the action start with just hunting gear, is to consolidate in one of houses and wait for a backup to help them. Or leave casualties, break contact and escape.
    I mean, that's so obvious that it's funny we are even discussing that.

    Of course that any trained SWAT member is just smirking reading all this.
    What is not so funny is how most people discussing "gun things" have, actually, no idea how that works.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Johnny Smoggins
    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them now to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they're getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they'll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    “As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far)”

    Nope, gun owning citizens outnumber cops and the military by well over 100 to 1. You just showed everyone participating here that you’re a shill and that you’re probably swapping spit with that Mason clown. You just made my ignore list.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Achmed E. Newman
    Let me try my patience again, Jonathan, as this is an opportunity to show you my point from last week. Do you understand what Mr. Derbyshire meant by including "Come and get them, you bastards"? (often phrased "Molon Labe!" by the gun rights people.)?

    The 2nd Amendment was NOT about duck hunting or self-defense, even though Americans are right that these benefits of these tools we call firearms are good ones. What Mr. Derbyshire wrote about just before this was a description of the increasing anarcho-tyranny in this country. That, the increasingly-powerful police state, and the size of the US Feral Gov't, is the reason patriotic Americans have been fighting efforts by people like you to destroy the 2nd Amendment since before you and John Derbyshire were living here, and even before we all on here were born!

    My point last week was that John Derbyshire has been here since the early 1990's (just read the jeep story- fantastic!), while you say you've been in America 1/2 decade > than that. Why haven't you learned a damn thing, Jonathan? Couldn't you pick up anything from a fellow ex-Englishman, or better yet, your Southern* neighbors.

    .
    .

    Maybe you live S. of the I-4, so they may be your Yankee/Cuban neighbors - can't learn much from them, I suppose.

    Don’t feed the trolls. This Mason imbecile would have given up and wandered off weeks ago if people here had been able to restrain themselves from flapping their meat at him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. peterAUS says:
    @El Dato
    Ghouta-nya-nya.

    But would it work if there are no third-party players like the US/Saudi Arabia shipping in crates of weapons?

    If…if I got your comment right you are comparing current town operations in Syria with similar scenarios in USA?

    As I said, it’s politically, so, practically, impossible scenario.

    The key is to force the Government to use a heavy hand, hence it can not.

    So, yes, against any police effort and against any light military effort, an average town in Midwest can do well, no problem at all.

    It can not do well against heavy government push.
    Besides, even if Government does order that, would the troops do it? Not do it…but do it well?
    Not Generals and Colonels, they probably will…hell even Majors. But Captains, and the most important, squad leaders. Squad leaders are the key in this game. Would they lead their squads in heavy house to house fighting Falluja style?
    I just don’t think so.

    Do I make sense here?

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato

    Do I make sense here?
     
    Yes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @European-American
    Apparently, 25% of Americans own guns. So I presume something like 75% of Americans are like me: don't own guns, don't care much about them one way or another. Call us benighted, it's ok, I'm just talking facts and perceptions here, not what is right and good.

    To be more specific about my own vague feelings about guns, I have used guns a few times and feel they are pretty fun and possibly useful and I like the idea of people having guns in a safe and responsible way. I'd prefer if the US could remain an exception among countries of the world with happily and safely armed citizens.

    However, I honestly don't care much about the issue, so it seems utterly normal for me, after yet another nasty shooting incident, to talk about ways of avoiding such incidents. Why is it so easy for lunatics to buy horribly dangerous weapons, etc. bla, bla bla.

    And yeah these people reacting with "you can take this gun from my cold dead hands" sound hysterical to me. I don't know what Trump said (don't care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.


    Does Trump actually understand words and meanings?
     
    John, I usually like what you say, but here you sound like a nerd to me. I bet Trump understands words and meanings quite well when they are written down in a legal contract. He also understands that when they are just spoken, for example on TV, they have much fuzzier definitions. It's all about emotions. Agreeing with what the last person said is often good politics.

    Again, I admit I don't know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters' views about guns.

    ” I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.”

    I doubt that. Even the mewling little queers in California are divided on the subject of firearms and have an opinion on the subject. If you usually like what Mason says, you belong at Huffpo, not here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    First hit in a search for “gun poll”:

    Three-quarters of people polled said gun laws should be stricter than they are today. That's an increase — in a short period of time — from October 2017, when NPR conducted a similar survey in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. Then, 68 percent said gun laws should be stricter than they were.
    https://www.npr.org/2018/03/02/589849342/npr-poll-after-parkland-number-of-americans-who-want-gun-restrictions-grows

     

    Everyone’s got an opinion if you press them. But I bet most people don’t understand why guns are so important to the people here who wail that Trump has betrayed them over guns, and just don’t care that much. Except they’d like not to be shot by nutcases. This is a great opportunity for Trump to appear reasonable and representative of the vast majority of Americans.

    I don’t know Mason or what he usually says. I usually sympathize with what Derb says, and I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction. I’d get a little depressed locked up in Huffpo land.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Tipsy says:

    There’s a story – perhaps apocryphal – that a journalist asked Pope John XXIII how many people worked in the Vatican Curia. Pope John responded “About half.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. @Joe Franklin

    The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

     

    Gotta ask.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    My understanding of the 14th is that it imposed all of the BoR restrictions on the federal government in the constitution, including the 2nd amendment, onto the state governments.

    The 14th guarantees that the state governments can't infringe gun rights too.

    Birth right citizenship is a threat to gun rights, especially as it applies to anchor babies born to illegal alien parents who are inclusive to at least one of the federal protected class groups.

    All federal protected class groups of people are generally leftist and anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

    It's questionable if the 14th protects babies born to illegal aliens in the US.

    You’ve never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn’t “questionable” at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    You’ve never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn’t “questionable” at all.

     

    How does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" apply to individuals who implicitly reject that jurisdiction?

    If Wong is right, then Plessy must also be. They were supported and dissented to by the same individual justices.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @peterAUS
    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn't need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well...I do hope that even the most "leftard" idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.

    “Your comment is simplistic.”

    Well of course it is; a simple truth can usually be expressed by a simple statement.

    “Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.”

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter. You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard. Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter.
     
    Ignorance wise, you've, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.

    You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard.
     
    One word: IEDs.

    Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.
     
    No, you don't. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.
     
    Haha...you...idiots...with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you...idiots...are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    The truth of future wars, especially interal wars is simply staring you in the face every day you turn on the TV.
    URBAN..............WARFARE.

    Repeat that 20 times and then, you and your ilk, could, maybe, get it.

    Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90's produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.
    One day, should you feel inclined, you can take a look at them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @Dr. X

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is irrelevant; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we're trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    “To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily “…wiped out by one good shooter armed with a 70 year old Garand in a position in an upper floor window overlooking their AO.

    The confiscation team would have to be rifle company sized, backed by a APC with a Ma Deuce to do more than disarm one household in a neighborhood. A dozen fat donut addicts wearing kevlar would scatter, pissing their pants if only one of their number were shot down while they attempted a home invasion.

    Let me know when that 5,000 man professional army turns up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Getting into the "Red Zone" here, a?

    First, my compliments to Mr. Unz for allowing this exchange of thoughts.
    Only once, so far in my rather long Internet presence, I've been alllowed this type of comments/posts.
    All other times, no, not even on "patriotic" sites.
    So.....my compliments indeed.

    An interesting scenario above.
    Imagine four guys, different vantage points, interlocking fires.
    12 guys.........
    40 guys......

    The level of "anti" ignorance is stunning.

    British Army, the best there is for that thing (yes, I do believe that, so let's not lose focus here) couldn't pacify Five Counties for decades.

    It's interesting to see the "progs", in a heartbeat, inventing Balkans, Chechnya, Lybia and Syria scenarios....on American soil.
    Of course that no civilian resistance is possible against a full might of US military.

    Makes you think a?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Truth says:

    He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail

    Dude, he has been president for 14 months now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. peterAUS says:
    @anarchyst
    Let's not forget the millions of us veterans out there who have been trained both in firearms and small-unit tactics.
    Definitely a formidable force, if the need arises.

    The problem with these discussions is, well, we can’t go all the way into the subject on the open Internet.
    Just can’t, and, well, shouldn’t.

    Bottom line, in a simple settlement, just several families, with most people on the same wavelength, that 12 member SWAT team simply has no chance of success. The best case scenario for them, should the action start with just hunting gear, is to consolidate in one of houses and wait for a backup to help them. Or leave casualties, break contact and escape.
    I mean, that’s so obvious that it’s funny we are even discussing that.

    Of course that any trained SWAT member is just smirking reading all this.
    What is not so funny is how most people discussing “gun things” have, actually, no idea how that works.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @niteranger
    It's simple Trump is being intimidated by the left. Trump thinks he's smarter than he is. He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail because they now allow unacceptable behavior no matter how sick it is to keep their statistics equal. You never give up the offensive. Attack ..Attack...Attack. The left cannot handle a sustained attack.

    It’s now obvious that Trump is actually a member of the left. He also has delusions of adequacy. I’ve often told his fans that they need to prepare themselves for the possibility that he’s a total mongoloid. I hope they’ve prepared themselves, because the evidence has just been made public.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Twodees Partain
    " I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns."

    I doubt that. Even the mewling little queers in California are divided on the subject of firearms and have an opinion on the subject. If you usually like what Mason says, you belong at Huffpo, not here.

    First hit in a search for “gun poll”:

    Three-quarters of people polled said gun laws should be stricter than they are today. That’s an increase — in a short period of time — from October 2017, when NPR conducted a similar survey in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. Then, 68 percent said gun laws should be stricter than they were.

    https://www.npr.org/2018/03/02/589849342/npr-poll-after-parkland-number-of-americans-who-want-gun-restrictions-grows

    Everyone’s got an opinion if you press them. But I bet most people don’t understand why guns are so important to the people here who wail that Trump has betrayed them over guns, and just don’t care that much. Except they’d like not to be shot by nutcases. This is a great opportunity for Trump to appear reasonable and representative of the vast majority of Americans.

    I don’t know Mason or what he usually says. I usually sympathize with what Derb says, and I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction. I’d get a little depressed locked up in Huffpo land.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    ... I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction.
     
    Eviction, hell! If you write too much really stupid stuff here, Ron Unz will get you your own column.
    .
    .

    (I didn't mean "you" personally, E-A.)
    , @anarchyst
    If you trust ANY mainstream media poll, my friend, you are delusional. The way a question is presented has a direct impact on the polling response. For example, if the question asked is: "Are you against gun violence?" Most people will answer "yes". The polling organization and its sponsors will then declare that the responses are "proof" that most people favor gun control.
    Polling organizations cannot be trusted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @donut
    " I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people."

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it's not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in "retaliation" for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration . For me the number one issue for me is who controls our foreign policy esp. in regard to the ME . He promised us America and Americans first . His actions seem to indicate that he as almost every other pol. puts Israel first .
    As for the nutcases it's a manifestation of "behavioral sink", playing whack-a-mole is not a solution .

    Exactly; I couldn’t have said it better myself. That one war crime in Syria, by itself, where Orange Clown showed the world that he was willing to risk WW3 for the sake of the jewish-supremacist agenda in the Mideast, should’ve been enough to convince anyone that he’s just another anti-American traitor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. El Dato says:
    @peterAUS
    If...if I got your comment right you are comparing current town operations in Syria with similar scenarios in USA?

    As I said, it's politically, so, practically, impossible scenario.

    The key is to force the Government to use a heavy hand, hence it can not.

    So, yes, against any police effort and against any light military effort, an average town in Midwest can do well, no problem at all.

    It can not do well against heavy government push.
    Besides, even if Government does order that, would the troops do it? Not do it...but do it well?
    Not Generals and Colonels, they probably will...hell even Majors. But Captains, and the most important, squad leaders. Squad leaders are the key in this game. Would they lead their squads in heavy house to house fighting Falluja style?
    I just don't think so.

    Do I make sense here?

    Do I make sense here?

    Yes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @donut
    " I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people."

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it's not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in "retaliation" for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration . For me the number one issue for me is who controls our foreign policy esp. in regard to the ME . He promised us America and Americans first . His actions seem to indicate that he as almost every other pol. puts Israel first .
    As for the nutcases it's a manifestation of "behavioral sink", playing whack-a-mole is not a solution .

    I agree the Syrian attack was deeply disappointing. And I wish he would cut back on US military action all over the world, as he promised. But Rome wasn’t built in a day, and politics is messy. And I’ve come to realize Trump won’t do all the things I’d like him to do, nor even most of them.

    I still am happy he was elected instead of Clinton. Aren’t you?

    I may be naive, but I still give Trump the benefit of the doubt, and I don’t see anyone I’d rather have for the next term. I wish there was someone better, but for now I’ll settle for him over almost any Democrat or Republican likely to be elected.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    I think you misunderstand. When Trump fired those cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn't know what the consequences would be, nor did he apparently care. With that one reckless act he not only became a mass murderer, but he could've started WW3 and for what, exactly?

    If someone raped and killed a girl in the past, would you give the murderer the "benefit of the doubt" and let your daughter date the guy? I bet you wouldn't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. wayfarer says:

    Freedom is something that dies unless it’s used.
    – Hunter S. Thompson

    “Laws? We don’t need no stinkin’ laws!”

    Ghetto Gun Control, LLC. a subdivision of Black Market, Inc.

    …..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  107. El Dato says:
    @anarchyst
    The Murrah building was destroyed by government operatives--NOT McVeigh. Not only were there questionable records and activities going on there, a way was needed to defuse the various "militia movements" that were increasing in popularity due to government abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. There is NO WAY that a "fertilizer bomb" could wreak the destruction that the building sustained. In fact, the glass windows of the "water board building" across the street were untouched. There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which "maintenance people" were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt). Of course, they managed to find the truck's axle, undamaged, not unlike the "passports" found in the rubble of the WTC.
    Look how quickly McVeigh was executed, along with emotional non-testimony being allowed in the "kangaroo court" that was McVeigh's "trial".
    Governments are not averse to using innocent civilians as "pawns", murdering them to achieve a political and social objective.
    Look at the school shootings in which "trained law enforcement" (still) sits on their hands until the shooting stops.
    Par for the course...

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained.

    I completely disagree. It’s just a standard compound used in mining & construction. Makes a big hole.

    Actually it was used in the first attack on the WTC (1997), too. Wrecked the parking garage.

    There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt).

    That’s the first time I have ever heard of that, and I have seen some stuff (what about the “sudden suicide” of the guy who looked like John Doe 2 in the holding cell?). You sure this isn’t the WTC meme being backported in time? Really, you just need one guy, not a maintenance team; this isn’t precision work. Like in the that X-Files movie, where the bomb is rolled into the FBI building inside an apparently functional vending machine (I suppose this was a clin d’oeuil to the OKC bombing).

    Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.

    This must be “ironic”. Of course you will find the axle, it’s not an antimatter bomb.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    ANFO is not a high explosive and its force is spent a short distance from where it is detonated. You can blow a stump, or move earth with it, but you can't detonate it at the distance the truck was parked from the Murrah building and do more than break some glass.

    You should avoid trying to discuss subjects you have no knowledge of except to ask questions. Making statements like those you just made reveals your lack of knowledge. Go back to watching movies, but don't expect to learn anything about explosives.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. I don’t know what Donald Trump thinks. One thing at least has become clear in the last year: that he is an expert dissembler, and that this is one of his most effective tools in “the art of the deal”. Nobody knows what he thinks, and (so far as I can tell) he’s at least a lap ahead of all his opposition (the public ones anyway). The neat trick about being a lap ahead is that he looks like he’s running neck and neck – while he’s actually a lap ahead.

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn’t share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire’s views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election – and that he loves his country and wants to save it. However, he is up against a situation that few if any other men have ever faced.

    We’ve all been trained to see the US President as a kind of emperor, who rules simply by decree: Thus it shall be, he says, and so it is. However, what few seem to understand is that the Imperial Presidency is merely the figurehead of the Establishment (aka “deep state”) that actually runs the country. So the Bushes, Clinton et al. could look like they are ruling by decree, because their decrees were what their real bosses wanted to happen, and the entire DC power structure was ready to implement them.

    So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.

    The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to “drain the swamp”. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.

    So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it? That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall? How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)

    There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One? (b) Trump had good intentions, but has been gradually (and rather quickly) influenced by those around him (including the traitors in his own family) to abandon them and get with the program. This scenario, however, doesn’t seem to fit with the clever, devious (though not dishonest) Donald Trump we know from his incredibly successful business career.

    Or maybe (c)? Finding himself alone in a very dangerous (possibly fatal) situation, he is doing everything he can simply to survive – long enough to see if the American people who put him in office will come through with enough actual, tangible support to allow him to actually get something done. And part of that strategy could be to cave enough to get his base angry enough to actually do something, rather than just complaining that he’s not getting it done all by himself.

    I think the real turning point – if there is one – will be the 2018 midterm elections. Trump came on the scene so suddenly in 2016 that there wasn’t time for more than one or two supportive congressional candidates to give it a try – and, as in the case of the guy who ran against Paul Ryan, they didn’t get anywhere. The American people have been programmed for a long time. Many have been waking up in the last year, but it remains to be seen if there will be enough.

    One thing seems clear: if “conservatives” just throw tantrums (like the Z-Man) and abandon him, he will certainly fail. But it won’t be his fault. This country is, after all, a republic; i.e. a “thing of the people”. It’s up to the people what they want to do with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    (Somehow I mistakenly made this reply to myself rather than Philalethes).

    “So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.”

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    “The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to ‘drain the swamp’. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.”

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can’t appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can’t he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn’t be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the “swamp”, would he?

    “So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?”

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don’t ignore it. That’s what you should be worried about.

    “That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?”

    The “wall” is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    “How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)”

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he’s escalating. He’s getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn’t have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn’t have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    “There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?”

    You don’t know that Clinton was their “chosen one”. In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a “prop”. Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown’s camp, which swung the election to him.
    , @Truth

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn’t share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire’s views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election
     


    A whopping 70 percent of Trump’s statements that PolitiFact checked during the campaign were false, while only 4 percent were completely true, and 11 percent mostly true. (Compare that to the politician Trump dubbed “crooked,” Hillary Clinton: Just 26 percent of her statements were deemed false.)

     

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-lies-liar-effect-brain-214658


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQruDaf7bKs
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @European-American
    I agree the Syrian attack was deeply disappointing. And I wish he would cut back on US military action all over the world, as he promised. But Rome wasn’t built in a day, and politics is messy. And I’ve come to realize Trump won’t do all the things I’d like him to do, nor even most of them.

    I still am happy he was elected instead of Clinton. Aren’t you?

    I may be naive, but I still give Trump the benefit of the doubt, and I don’t see anyone I’d rather have for the next term. I wish there was someone better, but for now I’ll settle for him over almost any Democrat or Republican likely to be elected.

    I think you misunderstand. When Trump fired those cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn’t know what the consequences would be, nor did he apparently care. With that one reckless act he not only became a mass murderer, but he could’ve started WW3 and for what, exactly?

    If someone raped and killed a girl in the past, would you give the murderer the “benefit of the doubt” and let your daughter date the guy? I bet you wouldn’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit."

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    "The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to 'drain the swamp'. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do."

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can't appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can't he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn't be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the "swamp", would he?

    "So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?"

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don't ignore it. That's what you should be worried about.

    "That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?"

    The "wall" is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    "How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)"

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he's escalating. He's getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn't have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn't have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    "There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?"

    You don't know that Clinton was their "chosen one". In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a "prop". Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown's camp, which swung the election to him.
    , @European-American
    I think he had a pretty good idea of what the consequences were. All US presidents kill. It goes with the job. It seems naïve not to acknowledge that. Or a double standard. Are you not aware that US policy has claimed innocent lives every year since the US was founded? It's a sad, but apparently inevitable fact related to being a powerful nation in a violent world.

    To paraphrase the old joke, we have already established what kind of man a president is. Now we are just haggling over policy choices. It's too early to tell if Trump's body count will equal Bush's or even Obama's. I hope he is smart and lucky enough that it will be lower.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    “Potentially dangerous”

    Yes well who determines this? At which point does an individual cross this line? Where is the line? Is it an arbitrary standard or will it be applied rigidly? If it is applied rigidly, and it’s found to have a “disparate impact,” what then?

    When your political ideology is found by (((psychiatry))) to be a symptom of mental illness, will it then follow that you are “potentially dangerous” and need to be disarmed?

    Driving is “potentially dangerous.” Opening your front door and crossing the threshold is “potentially dangerous.” Life is not a risk-free enterprise. Approach it like a man.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    A very good post.

    I honestly believe that the conversations about mass shootings in USA should follow that line of thought.
    Not guns..........but society in general and individuals in particular.
    Or, better, parts of US society that produce such events.

    Why some parts of US society have such events, and some parts do not, for example?

    That would be a quite interesting conversation.

    I really believe that guys into the 2nd should go that way.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Anon
    Look...

    guns are good in the hands of sane and moral people

    but

    guns are hell on earth in the hands of insane people.


    There is something really sick about our culture. Too many kids grow up crazy.

    We need to oppose gun bans, but we need more gun control.

    If US didn't have so many sickos, we could have laxer gun laws. But we are not living in that kind of America.

    Now, we all know criminals shouldn't buy guns, and there are laws against them purchasing them, which is why they get them illegally.

    But non-criminals can use guns to do crazy things. And our culture of profanity, vulgarity, trashiness, and drugs(legal and illegal) has turned too many people into nuts. Also, young ones are especially confused, and our sick culture gives them no guidance. The elites don't even have the spine to oppose decadent homomania or condemn 'twerking' as ape-like behavior.

    In the past, the gun issue was good people with guns vs criminals with guns.
    Now, it's far more complicated because so many people who do harm with guns are not criminals, and many don't have a criminal record. Rather, they are crazies with dead souls.

    The current pop culture ideal for young girls is The Slut, and the current ideal for young boys is The Thug. Even churches fly homo flags and celebrate fecal penetration as rainbow and praise trannies to get their penises and balls cut to get fake vaginas. Our media are den of lies told by sociopathic propagandists.

    In this crazy world were young ones can easily grow up to be nuts, we need both more gun control and a total culture war on the forces that are murdering young souls. Deads souls will use guns to turn people into dead bodies.

    At any rate, guns should be the last resort anyway. Against tyranny or crime, guns are to be used only when push comes to shove. Guns, even if legally owned, are like insurance. They don't come into play 99.99% of the time.

    The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.
    Since globalist Liberalism is murdering the souls of young people with degeneracy and decadency, the patriotic conservatives must save the souls with healthy and sane culture. That must be the theme. Saving souls from those who would murder souls.

    “The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.”

    Did you miss the part where the Feds used bayonets to integrate schools in the South?

    It’s a myth that the left won it’s culture war simply with words and ideas. In truth it had the full might and power of the US government behind it. If you don’t educate the blacks/sell houses to immigrants/bake a cake for two poofters, the government will KILL YOU. First you get a warning. If you fail to heed the warning, you get a fine. If you ignore the fine, you will be imprisoned. If you resist imprisonment, they will kill you.

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We’re not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Precisely.

    Couldn't agree more.

    I've, personally, used that line of reasoning plenty of times when discussing related topic. It's simply mind boggling that most people simply don't get it. Actually, more "educated" they are, less likely for them is to get it.

    Makes you think.
    Or really cynical.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    "Your comment is simplistic."

    Well of course it is; a simple truth can usually be expressed by a simple statement.

    "Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease."

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter. You don't make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard. Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    The "war" would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don't have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter.

    Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.

    You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard.

    One word: IEDs.

    Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.

    Haha…you…idiots…with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you…idiots…are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    The truth of future wars, especially interal wars is simply staring you in the face every day you turn on the TV.
    URBAN…………..WARFARE.

    Repeat that 20 times and then, you and your ilk, could, maybe, get it.

    Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90′s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.
    One day, should you feel inclined, you can take a look at them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it."

    Idiot, I don't need combat experience to know that if you're wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle. But common sense isn't your strong suit.

    "One word: IEDs."

    LOL! As if IEDs grow on trees. You need high explosives, lots of high explosives, and you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It's not a trivial thing, your wild imagination notwithstanding.

    "No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?"

    Well it's your fantasy, you might as well knock your socks off.

    , @Joe Stalin
    "Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90′s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject."

    https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/fms.html

    Unrestricted

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/

    Army Field Manuals

    Make yourself really, REALLY dangerous to TPTB by learning basic infantry skills.

    Project Appleseed - Revolutionary War Veteran's Association - RWVA.org

    "What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored."

    "The days of imposing America’s will on others with impunity may be over. The diffusion of skills and technology, the increased likelihood of messy urban operations, and the waning political appetite for military adventurism should be sobering to our leadership. "

    https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Svigor says:

    The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”?

    Derb, you’re literate. You know as well as I do, barring senility, that the well-regulated militia part is largely irrelevant. It’s fluff. Like so:

    “Lots of sexy women being good, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    “Filthy lucre being wonderful, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    “Pretty much everything works well on a pizza, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    The first part is a value statement, advice, etc. It’s a partial explanation of why the law is, not what the law is. The second part, after the comma, is the imperative, the law, THE ORDER THAT SHALL NOT BE CHANGED WITHOUT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

    Leftists have no case here, so don’t feed the trolls.

    What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.

    This is pretty simple, too:

    4 move while holding up or supporting; “Bear gifts”; “bear a heavy load”; “bear news”; “bearing orders”

    Since only people can have rights, the 2nd is referring to man-portable arms. I suppose there might be a Constitutional question to be answered once we get to the point of strength-enhancing exoskeletons or genetically engineered super-strength.

    I suppose technically hand grenades and suitcase nukes are covered by the 2nd, and I don’t suppose too many patriots would mind if the Supreme Court said *cough*not arms*cough*. So it’s not the thorniest issue, no.

    Modern legislation has only multiplied the ambiguities. What precisely counts as an “assault rifle”? Who gets to decide whether I am mentally healthy or not?

    Doesn’t really matter, since banning them or infringing the people’s right to produce, sell, keep, and bear them is unconstitutional.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”? What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.

    Modern legislation has only multiplied the ambiguities. What precisely counts as an “assault rifle”? Who gets to decide whether I am mentally healthy or not?


    Actually it is not ambiguous. In fact, it is quite simple even if a moron like Scalia thinks that every right has limitations and someone as brilliant as him knows what those limits should be - even as he claims that "strict scruntiny" whatever the hell that means can be defined such that everybody agrees.

    None of the rights in the Bill of Rights is subject to Executive, Legislative or Judicial review. The only limits to our rights are those limitations the people themselves place on them. If you don't think people should have a class of weapons or be able to say certain things, then amend the Constitution.

    The reason they don't is the same reason FDR used a silly taxing scheme to control automatic weapons and silencers, because it it too hard and takes too much work. Howere, they did it for alcohol they can do it for privately owned ma dueces if they want.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. peterAUS says:
    @Twodees Partain
    "To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily "...wiped out by one good shooter armed with a 70 year old Garand in a position in an upper floor window overlooking their AO.

    The confiscation team would have to be rifle company sized, backed by a APC with a Ma Deuce to do more than disarm one household in a neighborhood. A dozen fat donut addicts wearing kevlar would scatter, pissing their pants if only one of their number were shot down while they attempted a home invasion.

    Let me know when that 5,000 man professional army turns up.

    Getting into the “Red Zone” here, a?

    First, my compliments to Mr. Unz for allowing this exchange of thoughts.
    Only once, so far in my rather long Internet presence, I’ve been alllowed this type of comments/posts.
    All other times, no, not even on “patriotic” sites.
    So…..my compliments indeed.

    An interesting scenario above.
    Imagine four guys, different vantage points, interlocking fires.
    12 guys………
    40 guys……

    The level of “anti” ignorance is stunning.

    British Army, the best there is for that thing (yes, I do believe that, so let’s not lose focus here) couldn’t pacify Five Counties for decades.

    It’s interesting to see the “progs”, in a heartbeat, inventing Balkans, Chechnya, Lybia and Syria scenarios….on American soil.
    Of course that no civilian resistance is possible against a full might of US military.

    Makes you think a?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. peterAUS says:
    @Stripes Duncan
    "Potentially dangerous"

    Yes well who determines this? At which point does an individual cross this line? Where is the line? Is it an arbitrary standard or will it be applied rigidly? If it is applied rigidly, and it's found to have a "disparate impact," what then?

    When your political ideology is found by (((psychiatry))) to be a symptom of mental illness, will it then follow that you are "potentially dangerous" and need to be disarmed?

    Driving is "potentially dangerous." Opening your front door and crossing the threshold is "potentially dangerous." Life is not a risk-free enterprise. Approach it like a man.

    A very good post.

    I honestly believe that the conversations about mass shootings in USA should follow that line of thought.
    Not guns……….but society in general and individuals in particular.
    Or, better, parts of US society that produce such events.

    Why some parts of US society have such events, and some parts do not, for example?

    That would be a quite interesting conversation.

    I really believe that guys into the 2nd should go that way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @Harold Smith
    I think you misunderstand. When Trump fired those cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn't know what the consequences would be, nor did he apparently care. With that one reckless act he not only became a mass murderer, but he could've started WW3 and for what, exactly?

    If someone raped and killed a girl in the past, would you give the murderer the "benefit of the doubt" and let your daughter date the guy? I bet you wouldn't.

    “So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.”

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    “The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to ‘drain the swamp’. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.”

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can’t appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can’t he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn’t be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the “swamp”, would he?

    “So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?”

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don’t ignore it. That’s what you should be worried about.

    “That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?”

    The “wall” is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    “How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)”

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he’s escalating. He’s getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn’t have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn’t have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    “There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?”

    You don’t know that Clinton was their “chosen one”. In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a “prop”. Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown’s camp, which swung the election to him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @unit472
    I too went Whaaat! when Trump made that remark but I don't think gun absolutists like Zman or Derbyshire understand what they are up against this time.

    From CNBC-"BlackRock said despite its size it doesn't see it as "our place" to dictate what a company should do. However, "based on our engagement conversations and our long-term view of the company, we may vote against specific directors or we may vote against management on shareholder proposals."

    (((Larry Fink's ))) Blackrock is a $5 TRILLION dollar fund, i.e. it owns 20% of the S&P.

    Facebook's Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    Trump walked back his dumb comment back but it had a calming effect on public opinion. People understood what he meant. A school teacher or even a concerned citizen should be able to request a restraining order to protect the public from an obvious lunatic even if law enforcement and school superintendents won't! A hearing could be held and evidence presented. The Virginia Tech gunman, Tucson's Jared Loughner or Parkland's Nikolas Cruz could appear and argue they pose no threat to anyone. The judge would decide in the same way a domestic restraining order is issued ( they often aren't) and due process is observed.

    Century Arms, one of the largest assemblers of military look-a-like firearms in the U.S. (corporate headquarters in Florida, manufacturing facility in Vermont) is privately owned, although I believe the family owning it is Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Svigor says:

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    It is long since apparent that Jonathan Mason is either a troll, or non compos mentis, or both:

    http://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478 Jonathan Mason says:
    February 23, 2018 at 6:04 pm GMT • 300 Words

    The US is not a confederation of tribal chieftaincies each ruled by a warlord, where the reach of the national government is tenuous. Using guns to resist the power of the federal government is quite futile, as Waco and Ruby Ridge showed. Yes, it is true that the government botched this events and caused numerous unnecessary deaths, but clearly the Branch Davidians could never have won their miniature war with the federal government. They actually became guinea pigs for the Second Amendment, and without the Second Amendment most of them would be alive today.

    That’s probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It’s like saying Jonathan Mason’s cardboard space ship didn’t make it off the ground, so Moon Landings are impossible. It’s really impossible to overemphasize how stupid Jonathan Mason is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Pretty much.

    Waco scenario. Interestingly enough, at the same time, overseas, there were plenty of examples of quite the opposite scenarios.
    Mogadishu comes as one, actually.
    And, well....Balkans...........
    Then, some parts of former Warsaw pact.

    Waco, again.
    Let's imagine the same scenario but with:
    A former senior sergeant, US Army combat arms as an adviser; just two .50 cal or .338 caliber snipers; a couple of night vision devices (passive and/or thermal); just two RPGs or similar. All obtainable then, now, in the future with proper contacts, money and will.
    A week for those people to dig in?.

    All that event would've gone differently.
    Two ways, of course.

    The Clintons would've negotiated the outcome even if taking a year to do so.

    The Clintons would've sent tanks (reactive armor) and helicopter (armored) gunships.
    A "proper" Battle Group attack.
    The scale.
    Plausible at the time and place? Hard to say.

    , @Twodees Partain
    If it's apparent that he's a troll, why feed him? Trolls don't stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @donut
    " I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people."

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it's not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in "retaliation" for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration . For me the number one issue for me is who controls our foreign policy esp. in regard to the ME . He promised us America and Americans first . His actions seem to indicate that he as almost every other pol. puts Israel first .
    As for the nutcases it's a manifestation of "behavioral sink", playing whack-a-mole is not a solution .

    While the 2nd Amendment is important to me it’s not the reason I no longer support Trump . He was dead to me the moment he launched those missiles at the Syrians in “retaliation” for the phony gas attack less than two months into his Cluster**k of an administration.

    Amen to that. The attack on Syria caused me to lose all heart for Trump the man. We need better candidates to help consolidate the nascent nationalist movement he tapped into to help propel his improbable presidential run.

    On the specific issue of gun control and mass shootings, I only have a couple of things I wish to add. The reason why these shootings continue to happen in America, the reason why they are attended with the same tiresome hand-wringing and “what is to be done” platitudes time after time, and the reason why they pass from the headlines in less than a week, is because such acts are reflections of ourselves. American culture is all about toxic individuality, sensational media circuses, fame by any means, splashy personalities, and about never being “dissed.” America is a playground for sociopathic extroverts and a hellhole for anybody who wishes to live a dignified, contemplative, and quiet life. All the talk about making the shootings stop is nothing but pro forma moral posturing. Nobody really gives a rip that another schoolroom or concert crowd gets blown away every couple of months, and they certainly do not care enough to be willing to amend some of the fundamental contributing causes within the culture.

    To discuss this subject as if it had anything to do with gun control or with the psychiatric imprisonment of the disturbed is to completely miss the point. We’ve created a world devoid of value and beauty. Personally, I am not of the opinion that a raucous, drunken mob, gyrating and twerking away in a gambling den to the loathsome noise that we call music, or a throng of fantasists pressed into a movie theater on the opening night of the latest Batman installment, represents anything that needs to be preserved or defended. Are these “innocent” people living meaningful lives? No; they are ghastly spectacles populated by subhuman beasts. I could not possibly care what happens to them, not because I am a cruel and sadistic person, but because there is inherently nothing there to care about.

    The difference in the spiritual makeup between the person who forms such a mob and the person who shoots it up, it is very much less than what the media’s treatments of the subject would have us believe. We are supposed to consider the shooter as a deranged misfit or a psychological cripple, looking only to him as the sole cause of the “tragedy,” and the only debate we are allowed to have is about whether it is the gun or the gunner who must be locked away for our protection. What we ought to be asking is, Why are these raunchy concerts and violent cinematic hallucinations allowed to exist in the midst of us? Why are our children warehoused in horrible public schools where barbarities are perpetrated on a daily basis, and the only punishment doled out is to those who dare to speak the truth or defend themselves? There are countless, perfectly legal means by which to abort a child, betray a spouse, or game a living out of the system, but the lives of revelers and their freedom to party unmolested are supposedly sacrosanct?

    There is no consistency in this attitude, save the consistency that the individual’s right to endless pleasure-seeking with no consequences must be upheld come what may. It is pointless to decry the existence of shootings and bombings under such circumstances, as we have long since dissolved the standards that would cause men to expect civilized behavior from one another. In the future things will only get worse. The individual slaughters will become rarer, but they will be replaced by mob-on-mob clashes devoid of any semblance of a motivating ideal, occasioned by nothing more than football matches and comicon conventions; and this will be accepted as normal. It is ever in thus manner that high history winds itself up.

    The task before us now is not to figure out how to return to decency, for that it is impossible. It is to figure out how the rare few who possess genuine inwardness and religiosity can preserve themselves, outlast this age, and make their landfall in the future.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. peterAUS says:
    @Stripes Duncan
    "The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America."

    Did you miss the part where the Feds used bayonets to integrate schools in the South?

    It's a myth that the left won it's culture war simply with words and ideas. In truth it had the full might and power of the US government behind it. If you don't educate the blacks/sell houses to immigrants/bake a cake for two poofters, the government will KILL YOU. First you get a warning. If you fail to heed the warning, you get a fine. If you ignore the fine, you will be imprisoned. If you resist imprisonment, they will kill you.

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We're not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.

    Precisely.

    Couldn’t agree more.

    I’ve, personally, used that line of reasoning plenty of times when discussing related topic. It’s simply mind boggling that most people simply don’t get it. Actually, more “educated” they are, less likely for them is to get it.

    Makes you think.
    Or really cynical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Svigor says:

    Jonathan Mason again:

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This man is stupid.

    Gooks who wiped their asses with their hands and wore sandals made out of used tires took 173,000 square kilometers of Vietnamese territory from the US gov’t, who were using every bit of their air supremacy, which the USG won’t be against domestic enemies.

    Goatherds who hump their sisters and their livestock are currently in the process of taking 652,000 square kilometers of Afghan territory from the US gov’t, whose military are under much less strict Rules of Engagement than they would be on US soil.

    The man is stupid. He couldn’t find his ass with two hands. He produces low evaluations of human competence because he is incompetent; he projects his own incompetence onto others. He can’t even avoid sounding like an idiot on an internet forum, where he has as much time as he likes to compose his thoughts beforehand.

    P.S., Ron Unz, looks like the link handling is mangling some HTML; I double-checked and that tag was formatted properly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  122. Svigor says:

    Here’s the link to show how truly stupid Jonathan Mason is:

    http://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478

    Jonathan Mason says:
    February 23, 2018 at 6:04 pm GMT • 300 Words

    The US is not a confederation of tribal chieftaincies each ruled by a warlord, where the reach of the national government is tenuous. Using guns to resist the power of the federal government is quite futile, as Waco and Ruby Ridge showed. Yes, it is true that the government botched this events and caused numerous unnecessary deaths, but clearly the Branch Davidians could never have won their miniature war with the federal government. They actually became guinea pigs for the Second Amendment, and without the Second Amendment most of them would be alive today.

    He’s even too stupid to know that the potato-eating Micks whupped the British gov’t, right in their own back yard. Reading his posts is like driving down the road, looking over, and seeing a kid with Downs Syndrome driving the car next to you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  123. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Strange

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  124. @peterAUS

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter.
     
    Ignorance wise, you've, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.

    You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard.
     
    One word: IEDs.

    Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.
     
    No, you don't. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.
     
    Haha...you...idiots...with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you...idiots...are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    The truth of future wars, especially interal wars is simply staring you in the face every day you turn on the TV.
    URBAN..............WARFARE.

    Repeat that 20 times and then, you and your ilk, could, maybe, get it.

    Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90's produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.
    One day, should you feel inclined, you can take a look at them.

    “Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.”

    Idiot, I don’t need combat experience to know that if you’re wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle. But common sense isn’t your strong suit.

    “One word: IEDs.”

    LOL! As if IEDs grow on trees. You need high explosives, lots of high explosives, and you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It’s not a trivial thing, your wild imagination notwithstanding.

    “No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?”

    Well it’s your fantasy, you might as well knock your socks off.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    ....I don’t need combat experience....
     
    Understand.
    You are "educated and well read progressive".
    Well read as not reading declassified, at least, Army manuals type.

    ....if you’re wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle.
     
    True. You are. Imagine...going into fight at significant disadvantage. Horror concept for "chattering classes" which, somehow, makes the fight for the 2nd even more promising.

    The opponents need to dismount. And approach the building you are in. Their approach being overlooked by several other guys with hunting rifles too. That's what Five P's, in combat, are all about. Or METT-T. Having a UNIT. Even with hunting rifles. The stuff you don't read of course.
    Anyway...
    They need to get into the building. Takes time. All that time "overlooked by....".
    Then they get in. Awesome. But, that vehicle is out. And the body armor is heavy. And up the stairs/down the stairs they go. On legs. Unprotected legs. Arms...even face.......12 gauge buckshot for example. And obstacles. Just little IEDs here and there. Etc.
    Say, 12 story building? Just one, OK, make it four.
    Full of civilians that don't like them at all. Not some far away "towelheads" but Americans. As their family and friends. Just one too soon twitch of the trigger finger and a little American girl goes down. Or a fraction of second too late and he eats buckshot from 5 meters in face?
    Easy for them, a?
    You still think you are at serious disadvantage here?

    ...you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It’s not a trivial thing...
     
    I, somehow, believe that in an average Midwest town in USA you can probably find, what, 20 guys who can do that?
    Enough I guess. Or you disagree?

    ...it’s your fantasy...
     
    Oh, I have more.
    One word:defection.
    As a platoon defection. Or guard squad at the depot. I just love that one. A good depot. With plenty of other things in copious amounts. They can even help you and your guys load all that into trucks.
    How about defection of a security detail at factory? Or supply unit moving that, and more, between posts/units?
    You want more?

    Re Svigor, below:

    C’mon guys, get it together already
     
    Well, you could try to put his idiocy in good use. Sort of "message relay" post.
    Besides, he is a proper member of "chattering class". Good to see them in action. Know your enemy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Svigor says:

    Jonathan Mason, I say this to be kind: you are too stupid for Unz.com. You should find a nice, safe, soft, leftist space for your comments, where you won’t be subjected to constant reminders of how stupid you really are.

    Leftists will pat you on the head for your stupidity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. Svigor says:

    These are comments from people who have lost the plot and are replying to Jonathan Mason as if he is mentally competent:

    Lemurmaniac #6
    Stripes Duncan #110

    These are comments from people who are properly dismissive of Jonathan Mason, but still don’t really understand that he is a moron who needs to be subjected to megadoses of vitriol and constant attacks on his room temperature IQ:

    Ok then #8
    Jenner Ickham Errican #24
    jacques sheete #30
    Achmed E. Newman #35

    Fred On Nothing (#46) is in a class of his own; he actually thinks JM is a Jew, a group known for their above average intelligence and capacity for argument, something that is strongly contra-indicated in JM’s comments.

    Gentlemen, please stop treating this retard like a competent citizen in good standing. He’s probably posting from a mental institution, or a halfway house, or his caretaker’s smart phone.

    He’s a complete asshat. A fool. A buffon. A clown. An idiot. A retard. A nincompoop. A dummy. A simpleton. A cretin. A moron. A dummkopf. An ass. A ninny. A dullard. A mongoloid. A half-wit. A dullard. An ignoramus. An imbecile. A mental mendicant.

    Is this sinking in?

    C’mon guys, get it together already.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Yes, I know Mason’s an idiot; his ‘reasoning’ as such is nonexistent. He’s also a troll, but an earnest troll in the sense that I think he truly believes in the positions he takes. I don’t address him out of anger, hence my lack of vitriol (I rarely get mad on the internet)—but I do enjoy mocking crap reasoning (and syntax) if the person deserves it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Philalethes
    I don't know what Donald Trump thinks. One thing at least has become clear in the last year: that he is an expert dissembler, and that this is one of his most effective tools in "the art of the deal". Nobody knows what he thinks, and (so far as I can tell) he's at least a lap ahead of all his opposition (the public ones anyway). The neat trick about being a lap ahead is that he looks like he's running neck and neck – while he's actually a lap ahead.

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn't share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire's views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election – and that he loves his country and wants to save it. However, he is up against a situation that few if any other men have ever faced.

    We've all been trained to see the US President as a kind of emperor, who rules simply by decree: Thus it shall be, he says, and so it is. However, what few seem to understand is that the Imperial Presidency is merely the figurehead of the Establishment (aka "deep state") that actually runs the country. So the Bushes, Clinton et al. could look like they are ruling by decree, because their decrees were what their real bosses wanted to happen, and the entire DC power structure was ready to implement them.

    So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.

    The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to "drain the swamp". Unfortunately, however, they didn't elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.

    So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it? That's already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall? How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the "Alpha" Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don't think it's accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that "real" Republicans are opposed to him.)

    There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One? (b) Trump had good intentions, but has been gradually (and rather quickly) influenced by those around him (including the traitors in his own family) to abandon them and get with the program. This scenario, however, doesn't seem to fit with the clever, devious (though not dishonest) Donald Trump we know from his incredibly successful business career.

    Or maybe (c)? Finding himself alone in a very dangerous (possibly fatal) situation, he is doing everything he can simply to survive – long enough to see if the American people who put him in office will come through with enough actual, tangible support to allow him to actually get something done. And part of that strategy could be to cave enough to get his base angry enough to actually do something, rather than just complaining that he's not getting it done all by himself.

    I think the real turning point – if there is one – will be the 2018 midterm elections. Trump came on the scene so suddenly in 2016 that there wasn't time for more than one or two supportive congressional candidates to give it a try – and, as in the case of the guy who ran against Paul Ryan, they didn't get anywhere. The American people have been programmed for a long time. Many have been waking up in the last year, but it remains to be seen if there will be enough.

    One thing seems clear: if "conservatives" just throw tantrums (like the Z-Man) and abandon him, he will certainly fail. But it won't be his fault. This country is, after all, a republic; i.e. a "thing of the people". It's up to the people what they want to do with it.

    (Somehow I mistakenly made this reply to myself rather than Philalethes).

    “So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.”

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    “The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to ‘drain the swamp’. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.”

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can’t appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can’t he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn’t be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the “swamp”, would he?

    “So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?”

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don’t ignore it. That’s what you should be worried about.

    “That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?”

    The “wall” is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    “How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)”

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he’s escalating. He’s getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn’t have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn’t have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    “There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?”

    You don’t know that Clinton was their “chosen one”. In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a “prop”. Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown’s camp, which swung the election to him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. peterAUS says:
    @Svigor

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:
     
    It is long since apparent that Jonathan Mason is either a troll, or non compos mentis, or both:

    http://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478 Jonathan Mason says:
    February 23, 2018 at 6:04 pm GMT • 300 Words

    The US is not a confederation of tribal chieftaincies each ruled by a warlord, where the reach of the national government is tenuous. Using guns to resist the power of the federal government is quite futile, as Waco and Ruby Ridge showed. Yes, it is true that the government botched this events and caused numerous unnecessary deaths, but clearly the Branch Davidians could never have won their miniature war with the federal government. They actually became guinea pigs for the Second Amendment, and without the Second Amendment most of them would be alive today.
     
    That's probably the stupidest thing I've ever read. It's like saying Jonathan Mason's cardboard space ship didn't make it off the ground, so Moon Landings are impossible. It's really impossible to overemphasize how stupid Jonathan Mason is.

    Pretty much.

    Waco scenario. Interestingly enough, at the same time, overseas, there were plenty of examples of quite the opposite scenarios.
    Mogadishu comes as one, actually.
    And, well….Balkans………..
    Then, some parts of former Warsaw pact.

    Waco, again.
    Let’s imagine the same scenario but with:
    A former senior sergeant, US Army combat arms as an adviser; just two .50 cal or .338 caliber snipers; a couple of night vision devices (passive and/or thermal); just two RPGs or similar. All obtainable then, now, in the future with proper contacts, money and will.
    A week for those people to dig in?.

    All that event would’ve gone differently.
    Two ways, of course.

    The Clintons would’ve negotiated the outcome even if taking a year to do so.

    The Clintons would’ve sent tanks (reactive armor) and helicopter (armored) gunships.
    A “proper” Battle Group attack.
    The scale.
    Plausible at the time and place? Hard to say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Svigor says:

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    This is pig-ignorant. History shows Western powers (US very much included) consistently losing guerrilla conflicts over the last century.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    This is off the mark, too. It’s not organization that’s lacking, it’s will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will “miraculously” materialize, the USG will get its ass handed to it in tatters, and the feds will rush to the negotiating table at C.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    The lack of will goes in the opposite direction, in this case.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.

    EA, you’ve lost the plot. The American voters have been clawing back their gun rights for the last two decades or so. That’s the trend.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings. The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I’ve barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.

    I repeat: there is only one barrier to the USG getting its ass kicked by a popular insurgency: the populace isn’t remotely interested in mounting an insurgency. At all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    It’s not organization that’s lacking, it’s will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will “miraculously” materialize...
     
    Agree.

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).
     
    Agree, up to a point.

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I’ve barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert
     
    Disagree, up to a point.

    And, explanation is coming based on


    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.
     
    This is how I see this and it is serious conversation now.
    You approach this as an individual American. You are what/who you are.

    I approach this as, well, not an American but with some experience in the matter.

    So, true, I don't know you Americans, your heart and soul, hence, my approach (or, well, the approach I've seen in action) would maybe not work for you.

    I'll try to explain by simple scenario:
    A uprising against the government of a county in Midwest. All...of....the...county. From political leadership there to the delivery boy there. Say,at least, 80 % of population. There are always people who will not fight no matter what. Different topic.

    In that scenario, yes, you do need to stop the armored vehicles. You do have to have a serious organization which would, simply, CiC the effort.
    Call this "European approach" if you will.

    You....approach this as "me and my mates and people on the same wavelength" are going against the government.

    Hope I make sense here.

    And, to be perfectly clear: the "county" option has serious chance of success.
    The "my guys" option, IMHO, has not.

    , @Harold Smith
    "My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings."

    Well you're here knucklehead, so I can't disagree with that.

    "The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! "

    Yes it does, asshat.

    "You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    If you had a clue, you'd know they're closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There's a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    "As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what?

    I mean anything that soft lead bullets have trouble penetrating, which is lots of things, knucklehead.

    "What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night?"

    So now you want to change the subject again chumpy?

    "Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip?

    What IED would that be? The one you pulled out of your ass?

    " (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens,"

    The government has plentiful M855A1 and M80A1 steel tipped ammo that will generally penetrate level 3 and level 3+ body armor. That ammo is not generally available to "the people". That means you'd need level 4 ceramic armor, which is expensive and needs to be replaced after being hit or even dropped.

    Also, the government has a choice of tungsten-carbide-cored ammo including M995 5.56mm and M993 7.62mm ammo that will defeat even level 4 boron carbide rifle plates. Thus the government has a monopoly on AP ammo, and as a practical matter, a monopoly on armor. I hope that clears things up for you, knucklehead.

    "though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace))."

    For some reason you and peterAUS want to change the subject. My point was that hardware matters. Of course "organization" matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight. I didn't mean to imply that the government would necessarily "win" an all out war against "the people". And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn't happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    "Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything."

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    , @Dr. X

    You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?
     
    You haven't been paying much attention to the gun-banners, have you? New York and California (60 million residents combined) have completely banned ammo sales outside of licensed retail establishments. We're not just talking so-called "AP" either (which green tip really is not, unlike, say, .30 cal black tip) -- I mean common stuff like .22 LR. Ditto for Washington, D.C., where SWAT will roll and do a no-knock raid for as little as a single 12 gauge shell.

    They're already implementing ammo bans and magazine bans along with gun bans. You can get seven years in NY for possessing an 11-round magazine.

    A LOT of guys are going to go to bed one night thinking they have Second Amendment rights, and are going to wake up the next morning with nothing but their dicks in their hands if they don't start paying attention to what's already been happening.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Svigor says:

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    This is a great example of how gobsmackingly stupid Jonathan Mason is. He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument. He’s too stupid to do arithmetic, for God’s sake (1 McVeigh = 168 dead feds, 5,000 McVeighs = x dead feds; can you solve for x, children?)

    It’s constant face-palm-level stupidity from this complete nincompoop.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument.
     
    Well, McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls and were all obsessed with conspiracy theories, so they would have fitted right in with many posters on this blog. McVeigh apparently made part of his living selling weapons at gun shows.

    Fortier seems to have gone quiet now, McVeigh was executed, and Nichols is still is prison, but if they were around today they would no doubt be posting the same bile under pseudonyms on the Internet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @El Dato

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained.
     
    I completely disagree. It's just a standard compound used in mining & construction. Makes a big hole.

    Actually it was used in the first attack on the WTC (1997), too. Wrecked the parking garage.


    There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt).
     
    That's the first time I have ever heard of that, and I have seen some stuff (what about the "sudden suicide" of the guy who looked like John Doe 2 in the holding cell?). You sure this isn't the WTC meme being backported in time? Really, you just need one guy, not a maintenance team; this isn't precision work. Like in the that X-Files movie, where the bomb is rolled into the FBI building inside an apparently functional vending machine (I suppose this was a clin d'oeuil to the OKC bombing).

    Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.
     
    This must be "ironic". Of course you will find the axle, it's not an antimatter bomb.

    ANFO is not a high explosive and its force is spent a short distance from where it is detonated. You can blow a stump, or move earth with it, but you can’t detonate it at the distance the truck was parked from the Murrah building and do more than break some glass.

    You should avoid trying to discuss subjects you have no knowledge of except to ask questions. Making statements like those you just made reveals your lack of knowledge. Go back to watching movies, but don’t expect to learn anything about explosives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Thanks for the information. If the truck had a sufficient amount of explosive in it would it be possible to blow up the building the way it did?

    Or would no amount be sufficient?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Svigor

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:
     
    It is long since apparent that Jonathan Mason is either a troll, or non compos mentis, or both:

    http://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478 Jonathan Mason says:
    February 23, 2018 at 6:04 pm GMT • 300 Words

    The US is not a confederation of tribal chieftaincies each ruled by a warlord, where the reach of the national government is tenuous. Using guns to resist the power of the federal government is quite futile, as Waco and Ruby Ridge showed. Yes, it is true that the government botched this events and caused numerous unnecessary deaths, but clearly the Branch Davidians could never have won their miniature war with the federal government. They actually became guinea pigs for the Second Amendment, and without the Second Amendment most of them would be alive today.
     
    That's probably the stupidest thing I've ever read. It's like saying Jonathan Mason's cardboard space ship didn't make it off the ground, so Moon Landings are impossible. It's really impossible to overemphasize how stupid Jonathan Mason is.

    If it’s apparent that he’s a troll, why feed him? Trolls don’t stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Alden says:
    @Twodees Partain
    "Look, I’m not saying that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, please don’t take offense. "

    Damn, John. You sound like Trump or one of those GOP cucks in Congress. Try this:

    "Look, all I’m saying is that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, kiss my ass and go get a real job."

    See? That sounds like a man with at least one testicle.

    Some departments are ok.

    For instance 150 years ago counterfeiting was rampant. The secret service cracked down and its almost non existent. Farmers appreciate the agriculture department. It does all sorts of helpful things.

    FAA makes flying safer than trains and car travel. Social Security administers the only pension system not subject to destruction by corporate raiders and the Wolves of Wall St.

    The crown jewel of the federal government is the national parks and the people who work in them.

    The rest might have some useful function but I can’t think of any right now.

    HUD needs to go. dept of education and EEOC need to go and all present past and employees sent to the gulag. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to go and all present and past employees sent to the gulag.

    I’m sure there are some other useful federal departments but can’t think of any.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Aldey didn't say all government jobs were held by blacks?
    , @Twodees Partain
    I still think that they are all incompetent, and that all of them operate outside their own boundaries. Here's a really big big problem: these departments and their agencies can issue regulations that have the force of law.

    They aren't even part of the legislative branch, but they can send federal agents to your house to enforce some regulation that you don't even know exists. They can make a natural herb that you use instead of an expensive medication illegal with the stroke of a pen and without even announcing the ban.

    That makes them dangerous, especially since they are made up of do-nothing fuckoffs, but they are also led by political appointees who are out to advance their own influence and feather their own nests via salaries and retirement benefits.

    Of course these welfare queen farmers love them some DoA and the checks they get for not planting this or that. That doesn't make the department competent or even legal under the constitution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Alden says:
    @Twodees Partain
    ANFO is not a high explosive and its force is spent a short distance from where it is detonated. You can blow a stump, or move earth with it, but you can't detonate it at the distance the truck was parked from the Murrah building and do more than break some glass.

    You should avoid trying to discuss subjects you have no knowledge of except to ask questions. Making statements like those you just made reveals your lack of knowledge. Go back to watching movies, but don't expect to learn anything about explosives.

    Thanks for the information. If the truck had a sufficient amount of explosive in it would it be possible to blow up the building the way it did?

    Or would no amount be sufficient?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    According to Brigadier General Benton Partin, who investigated the bombing, no amount of ANFO placed that far out in front of the building could have done what the actual planted charges did. Main support columns were cut. That had to be accomplished with cutting charges placed on the columns.

    https://100777.com/node/106

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/ok8.htm

    There are lots of statements by General Partin archived online.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. J1234 says:

    I’m Not Giving Up My Guns-

    I agree with John…except that I don’t have any guns to give up since I lost all of mine in that big trailer park fire in Mudville last year (just in case someone from the government is reading this.)

    And John, don’t you remember? You lost all of your guns when that big rig you were driving slid off a mountain road in Montana!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  136. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    "Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it."

    Idiot, I don't need combat experience to know that if you're wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle. But common sense isn't your strong suit.

    "One word: IEDs."

    LOL! As if IEDs grow on trees. You need high explosives, lots of high explosives, and you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It's not a trivial thing, your wild imagination notwithstanding.

    "No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?"

    Well it's your fantasy, you might as well knock your socks off.

    ….I don’t need combat experience….

    Understand.
    You are “educated and well read progressive”.
    Well read as not reading declassified, at least, Army manuals type.

    ….if you’re wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle.

    True. You are. Imagine…going into fight at significant disadvantage. Horror concept for “chattering classes” which, somehow, makes the fight for the 2nd even more promising.

    The opponents need to dismount. And approach the building you are in. Their approach being overlooked by several other guys with hunting rifles too. That’s what Five P’s, in combat, are all about. Or METT-T. Having a UNIT. Even with hunting rifles. The stuff you don’t read of course.
    Anyway…
    They need to get into the building. Takes time. All that time “overlooked by….”.
    Then they get in. Awesome. But, that vehicle is out. And the body armor is heavy. And up the stairs/down the stairs they go. On legs. Unprotected legs. Arms…even face…….12 gauge buckshot for example. And obstacles. Just little IEDs here and there. Etc.
    Say, 12 story building? Just one, OK, make it four.
    Full of civilians that don’t like them at all. Not some far away “towelheads” but Americans. As their family and friends. Just one too soon twitch of the trigger finger and a little American girl goes down. Or a fraction of second too late and he eats buckshot from 5 meters in face?
    Easy for them, a?
    You still think you are at serious disadvantage here?

    …you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It’s not a trivial thing…

    I, somehow, believe that in an average Midwest town in USA you can probably find, what, 20 guys who can do that?
    Enough I guess. Or you disagree?

    …it’s your fantasy…

    Oh, I have more.
    One word:defection.
    As a platoon defection. Or guard squad at the depot. I just love that one. A good depot. With plenty of other things in copious amounts. They can even help you and your guys load all that into trucks.
    How about defection of a security detail at factory? Or supply unit moving that, and more, between posts/units?
    You want more?

    Re Svigor, below:

    C’mon guys, get it together already

    Well, you could try to put his idiocy in good use. Sort of “message relay” post.
    Besides, he is a proper member of “chattering class”. Good to see them in action. Know your enemy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. peterAUS says:
    @Svigor

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?
     
    This is pig-ignorant. History shows Western powers (US very much included) consistently losing guerrilla conflicts over the last century.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.
     
    This is off the mark, too. It's not organization that's lacking, it's will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will "miraculously" materialize, the USG will get its ass handed to it in tatters, and the feds will rush to the negotiating table at C.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).
     
    The lack of will goes in the opposite direction, in this case.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.
     
    EA, you've lost the plot. The American voters have been clawing back their gun rights for the last two decades or so. That's the trend.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings. The USG doesn't have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a "pre-dawn raid" on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that's wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it's hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I've barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.
     
    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can't think of anything.

    I repeat: there is only one barrier to the USG getting its ass kicked by a popular insurgency: the populace isn't remotely interested in mounting an insurgency. At all.

    It’s not organization that’s lacking, it’s will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will “miraculously” materialize…

    Agree.

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    Agree, up to a point.

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I’ve barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert

    Disagree, up to a point.

    And, explanation is coming based on

    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.

    This is how I see this and it is serious conversation now.
    You approach this as an individual American. You are what/who you are.

    I approach this as, well, not an American but with some experience in the matter.

    So, true, I don’t know you Americans, your heart and soul, hence, my approach (or, well, the approach I’ve seen in action) would maybe not work for you.

    I’ll try to explain by simple scenario:
    A uprising against the government of a county in Midwest. All…of….the…county. From political leadership there to the delivery boy there. Say,at least, 80 % of population. There are always people who will not fight no matter what. Different topic.

    In that scenario, yes, you do need to stop the armored vehicles. You do have to have a serious organization which would, simply, CiC the effort.
    Call this “European approach” if you will.

    You….approach this as “me and my mates and people on the same wavelength” are going against the government.

    Hope I make sense here.

    And, to be perfectly clear: the “county” option has serious chance of success.
    The “my guys” option, IMHO, has not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Svigor

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?
     
    This is pig-ignorant. History shows Western powers (US very much included) consistently losing guerrilla conflicts over the last century.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.
     
    This is off the mark, too. It's not organization that's lacking, it's will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will "miraculously" materialize, the USG will get its ass handed to it in tatters, and the feds will rush to the negotiating table at C.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).
     
    The lack of will goes in the opposite direction, in this case.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.
     
    EA, you've lost the plot. The American voters have been clawing back their gun rights for the last two decades or so. That's the trend.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings. The USG doesn't have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a "pre-dawn raid" on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that's wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it's hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I've barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.
     
    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can't think of anything.

    I repeat: there is only one barrier to the USG getting its ass kicked by a popular insurgency: the populace isn't remotely interested in mounting an insurgency. At all.

    “My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings.”

    Well you’re here knucklehead, so I can’t disagree with that.

    “The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! ”

    Yes it does, asshat.

    “You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    If you had a clue, you’d know they’re closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There’s a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    “As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what?

    I mean anything that soft lead bullets have trouble penetrating, which is lots of things, knucklehead.

    “What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night?”

    So now you want to change the subject again chumpy?

    “Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip?

    What IED would that be? The one you pulled out of your ass?

    ” (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens,”

    The government has plentiful M855A1 and M80A1 steel tipped ammo that will generally penetrate level 3 and level 3+ body armor. That ammo is not generally available to “the people”. That means you’d need level 4 ceramic armor, which is expensive and needs to be replaced after being hit or even dropped.

    Also, the government has a choice of tungsten-carbide-cored ammo including M995 5.56mm and M993 7.62mm ammo that will defeat even level 4 boron carbide rifle plates. Thus the government has a monopoly on AP ammo, and as a practical matter, a monopoly on armor. I hope that clears things up for you, knucklehead.

    “though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).”

    For some reason you and peterAUS want to change the subject. My point was that hardware matters. Of course “organization” matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight. I didn’t mean to imply that the government would necessarily “win” an all out war against “the people”. And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn’t happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    “Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.”

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Well, maybe I was too harsh re that "chattering class".
    Maybe.

    My point was that hardware matters.
     
    Of course it does. Just doesn't in the way you were saying.
    A lot of other things matter too, even more.
    TERRAIN for example.

    Of course “organization” matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight.
     
    Or maybe you give hardware too much weight?
    Tanks in rural, power.
    Tanks in CBD, not so much.


    I didn’t mean to imply that the government would necessarily “win” an all out war against “the people”.
     
    Good.

    And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn’t happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.
     
    Ah........NO.
    That is exactly what should be done, again and again, all the time.

    Interestingly how the Governments of the world, and especially "armed wings" of those governments do that all the time.
    What and what can and can't happen with this/that potential enemy, threat, situation.
    Constant re-evaluation of all that; constant updating of processes and procedures; constant equipment upgrades, organizational/unit reorganizations; constant exercises/
    Constant effort.

    I mean, of course that governments can and should do that but citizens can't, or shouldn't, a?
    "Trust us, don't worry".
    with
    "You have no chance, just give up on that."
    Sort of cancels each other up, a?
    , @Twodees Partain
    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren't full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Truth says:
    @Philalethes
    I don't know what Donald Trump thinks. One thing at least has become clear in the last year: that he is an expert dissembler, and that this is one of his most effective tools in "the art of the deal". Nobody knows what he thinks, and (so far as I can tell) he's at least a lap ahead of all his opposition (the public ones anyway). The neat trick about being a lap ahead is that he looks like he's running neck and neck – while he's actually a lap ahead.

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn't share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire's views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election – and that he loves his country and wants to save it. However, he is up against a situation that few if any other men have ever faced.

    We've all been trained to see the US President as a kind of emperor, who rules simply by decree: Thus it shall be, he says, and so it is. However, what few seem to understand is that the Imperial Presidency is merely the figurehead of the Establishment (aka "deep state") that actually runs the country. So the Bushes, Clinton et al. could look like they are ruling by decree, because their decrees were what their real bosses wanted to happen, and the entire DC power structure was ready to implement them.

    So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.

    The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to "drain the swamp". Unfortunately, however, they didn't elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.

    So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it? That's already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall? How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the "Alpha" Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don't think it's accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that "real" Republicans are opposed to him.)

    There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One? (b) Trump had good intentions, but has been gradually (and rather quickly) influenced by those around him (including the traitors in his own family) to abandon them and get with the program. This scenario, however, doesn't seem to fit with the clever, devious (though not dishonest) Donald Trump we know from his incredibly successful business career.

    Or maybe (c)? Finding himself alone in a very dangerous (possibly fatal) situation, he is doing everything he can simply to survive – long enough to see if the American people who put him in office will come through with enough actual, tangible support to allow him to actually get something done. And part of that strategy could be to cave enough to get his base angry enough to actually do something, rather than just complaining that he's not getting it done all by himself.

    I think the real turning point – if there is one – will be the 2018 midterm elections. Trump came on the scene so suddenly in 2016 that there wasn't time for more than one or two supportive congressional candidates to give it a try – and, as in the case of the guy who ran against Paul Ryan, they didn't get anywhere. The American people have been programmed for a long time. Many have been waking up in the last year, but it remains to be seen if there will be enough.

    One thing seems clear: if "conservatives" just throw tantrums (like the Z-Man) and abandon him, he will certainly fail. But it won't be his fault. This country is, after all, a republic; i.e. a "thing of the people". It's up to the people what they want to do with it.

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn’t share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire’s views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election

    A whopping 70 percent of Trump’s statements that PolitiFact checked during the campaign were false, while only 4 percent were completely true, and 11 percent mostly true. (Compare that to the politician Trump dubbed “crooked,” Hillary Clinton: Just 26 percent of her statements were deemed false.)

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-lies-liar-effect-brain-214658

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Truth says:
    @Alden
    Some departments are ok.

    For instance 150 years ago counterfeiting was rampant. The secret service cracked down and its almost non existent. Farmers appreciate the agriculture department. It does all sorts of helpful things.

    FAA makes flying safer than trains and car travel. Social Security administers the only pension system not subject to destruction by corporate raiders and the Wolves of Wall St.

    The crown jewel of the federal government is the national parks and the people who work in them.

    The rest might have some useful function but I can’t think of any right now.

    HUD needs to go. dept of education and EEOC need to go and all present past and employees sent to the gulag. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to go and all present and past employees sent to the gulag.

    I’m sure there are some other useful federal departments but can’t think of any.

    Aldey didn’t say all government jobs were held by blacks?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @peterAUS

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter.
     
    Ignorance wise, you've, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.

    You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard.
     
    One word: IEDs.

    Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.
     
    No, you don't. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.
     
    Haha...you...idiots...with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you...idiots...are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    The truth of future wars, especially interal wars is simply staring you in the face every day you turn on the TV.
    URBAN..............WARFARE.

    Repeat that 20 times and then, you and your ilk, could, maybe, get it.

    Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90's produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.
    One day, should you feel inclined, you can take a look at them.

    “Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90′s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.”

    https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/fms.html

    Unrestricted

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/

    Army Field Manuals

    Make yourself really, REALLY dangerous to TPTB by learning basic infantry skills.

    Project Appleseed – Revolutionary War Veteran’s Association – RWVA.org

    “What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored.”

    “The days of imposing America’s will on others with impunity may be over. The diffusion of skills and technology, the increased likelihood of messy urban operations, and the waning political appetite for military adventurism should be sobering to our leadership. ”

    https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Yup......

    ...the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway....
     
    Yup.
    Platoon level unit in urban environment. "Brick" as a basic element. Skip the squad/section level. Something between Marine 13 men squad and "common" platoon. 4-6 bricks with command element.

    ...the increased likelihood of messy urban operations...
     
    And those "messy" in foreign lands. Even that not easy re "collateral damage".
    On US soil...whoah......I'd expect.
    Precise vs intense. Precise, of course, on US soil. So, of course, heavy hardware out.

    Small unit combat in MOUT. Hostile environment for attacker, friendly for defender.
    Psychological over physical, for both sides.

    Team against team, in high rises/underground places.
    The will to endure and win.

    That's, IMHO, is the game.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Alden
    Thanks for the information. If the truck had a sufficient amount of explosive in it would it be possible to blow up the building the way it did?

    Or would no amount be sufficient?

    According to Brigadier General Benton Partin, who investigated the bombing, no amount of ANFO placed that far out in front of the building could have done what the actual planted charges did. Main support columns were cut. That had to be accomplished with cutting charges placed on the columns.

    https://100777.com/node/106

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/ok8.htm

    There are lots of statements by General Partin archived online.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    "My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings."

    Well you're here knucklehead, so I can't disagree with that.

    "The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! "

    Yes it does, asshat.

    "You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    If you had a clue, you'd know they're closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There's a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    "As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what?

    I mean anything that soft lead bullets have trouble penetrating, which is lots of things, knucklehead.

    "What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night?"

    So now you want to change the subject again chumpy?

    "Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip?

    What IED would that be? The one you pulled out of your ass?

    " (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens,"

    The government has plentiful M855A1 and M80A1 steel tipped ammo that will generally penetrate level 3 and level 3+ body armor. That ammo is not generally available to "the people". That means you'd need level 4 ceramic armor, which is expensive and needs to be replaced after being hit or even dropped.

    Also, the government has a choice of tungsten-carbide-cored ammo including M995 5.56mm and M993 7.62mm ammo that will defeat even level 4 boron carbide rifle plates. Thus the government has a monopoly on AP ammo, and as a practical matter, a monopoly on armor. I hope that clears things up for you, knucklehead.

    "though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace))."

    For some reason you and peterAUS want to change the subject. My point was that hardware matters. Of course "organization" matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight. I didn't mean to imply that the government would necessarily "win" an all out war against "the people". And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn't happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    "Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything."

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    Well, maybe I was too harsh re that “chattering class”.
    Maybe.

    My point was that hardware matters.

    Of course it does. Just doesn’t in the way you were saying.
    A lot of other things matter too, even more.
    TERRAIN for example.

    Of course “organization” matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight.

    Or maybe you give hardware too much weight?
    Tanks in rural, power.
    Tanks in CBD, not so much.

    I didn’t mean to imply that the government would necessarily “win” an all out war against “the people”.

    Good.

    And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn’t happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    Ah……..NO.
    That is exactly what should be done, again and again, all the time.

    Interestingly how the Governments of the world, and especially “armed wings” of those governments do that all the time.
    What and what can and can’t happen with this/that potential enemy, threat, situation.
    Constant re-evaluation of all that; constant updating of processes and procedures; constant equipment upgrades, organizational/unit reorganizations; constant exercises/
    Constant effort.

    I mean, of course that governments can and should do that but citizens can’t, or shouldn’t, a?
    “Trust us, don’t worry”.
    with
    “You have no chance, just give up on that.”
    Sort of cancels each other up, a?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin
    "Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90′s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject."

    https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/fms.html

    Unrestricted

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/

    Army Field Manuals

    Make yourself really, REALLY dangerous to TPTB by learning basic infantry skills.

    Project Appleseed - Revolutionary War Veteran's Association - RWVA.org

    "What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored."

    "The days of imposing America’s will on others with impunity may be over. The diffusion of skills and technology, the increased likelihood of messy urban operations, and the waning political appetite for military adventurism should be sobering to our leadership. "

    https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/

    Yup……

    …the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway….

    Yup.
    Platoon level unit in urban environment. “Brick” as a basic element. Skip the squad/section level. Something between Marine 13 men squad and “common” platoon. 4-6 bricks with command element.

    …the increased likelihood of messy urban operations…

    And those “messy” in foreign lands. Even that not easy re “collateral damage”.
    On US soil…whoah……I’d expect.
    Precise vs intense. Precise, of course, on US soil. So, of course, heavy hardware out.

    Small unit combat in MOUT. Hostile environment for attacker, friendly for defender.
    Psychological over physical, for both sides.

    Team against team, in high rises/underground places.
    The will to endure and win.

    That’s, IMHO, is the game.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Sandy Berger's Socks
    Trump is playing a dangerous and stupid game in an election year.

    The lefties aren't going to remember his gun control rhetoric come November, but his base will.

    We voted for and need a leader not a weather vane.

    And this is how the ProgLeft has taken over. They may squabble, but they can circle the wagons behind a moat of atomic level bullshît and agitprop with military precision.

    Our side hits a small bump, and people are ready to vote for Kamala Harris to “send a message”, or just sit the election out (same effect), and do more damage than anything Trump could do if he tried.

    This is Trump doing his art of the deal routine like he’s been doing forever. Sweet feathery Jesus will the midwit gammas on the right clue in already?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Whatever, Inque. This "art of the deal" shit is useless, especially in the case of someone like Trump who will make a really bad deal just to make a deal. Face it; Trump wasn't playing 3D chess or making a deal, he was totally out of his depth, behaving like a moron on national TV.

    It may be time for you to face the fact that you're backing a mongoloid. Another fact to face is that there is no political solution to the current problem with government, at least not with the current political system.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Harold Smith
    "My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings."

    Well you're here knucklehead, so I can't disagree with that.

    "The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! "

    Yes it does, asshat.

    "You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    If you had a clue, you'd know they're closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There's a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    "As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what?

    I mean anything that soft lead bullets have trouble penetrating, which is lots of things, knucklehead.

    "What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night?"

    So now you want to change the subject again chumpy?

    "Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip?

    What IED would that be? The one you pulled out of your ass?

    " (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens,"

    The government has plentiful M855A1 and M80A1 steel tipped ammo that will generally penetrate level 3 and level 3+ body armor. That ammo is not generally available to "the people". That means you'd need level 4 ceramic armor, which is expensive and needs to be replaced after being hit or even dropped.

    Also, the government has a choice of tungsten-carbide-cored ammo including M995 5.56mm and M993 7.62mm ammo that will defeat even level 4 boron carbide rifle plates. Thus the government has a monopoly on AP ammo, and as a practical matter, a monopoly on armor. I hope that clears things up for you, knucklehead.

    "though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace))."

    For some reason you and peterAUS want to change the subject. My point was that hardware matters. Of course "organization" matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight. I didn't mean to imply that the government would necessarily "win" an all out war against "the people". And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn't happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    "Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything."

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren’t full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    I agree that their body armor doesn't make them invincible. But it's an advantage they have, and it continues to evolve and improve over time, i.e. more coverage, higher threat level protection and lighter weight. (I've seen DOD studies showing that their body armor significantly reduces casualties).

    They also have the new M855A1 and M80A1 ammo which is another advantage. There are a couple of youtubers who got some from gunbroker or somewhere and did some testing. M855A1 seems to be far more "barrier blind" than M855, and leaves a nasty wound channel. I'd really like to get some, but the feds seem to be going out of their way to keep it off the market.

    The ATF tried to ban M855 ammo a few years ago but they failed. I believe they did it not because of M855 per se, but because they were trying to prospectively prevent the introduction of steel (or even tungsten alloy) tipped ammo to the civilian market.

    The law banning AP ammo by its terms bans any bullets with a steel or tungsten heavy alloy (WHA) core, but it doesn't apply to bullet designs with a steel or WHA tip. And once the army started testing the new bullets and saw how effective they were, the "government" realized that there was a whole class of ammo with a hardened tip which was technically not illegal, so they tried to expand the scope of the ban by a ridiculous construction of the law, but luckily it failed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Svigor says:

    If it’s apparent that he’s a troll, why feed him? Trolls don’t stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.

    Cuz this is Unz.com and he’s gonna get fed. I say, feed this one nothing but shit.

    If you had a clue, you’d know they’re closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There’s a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    Yeah I’m sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech.

    Rest was TL;DR. You’re a dumb fuck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "Yeah I’m sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech."

    As if the unfounded opinion of an ignorant asshole such as yourself should carry any weight.

    "Rest was TL;DR. You’re a dumb fuck."

    Which is more than enough to show you up, goofball.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Inque Yutani
    And this is how the ProgLeft has taken over. They may squabble, but they can circle the wagons behind a moat of atomic level bullshît and agitprop with military precision.

    Our side hits a small bump, and people are ready to vote for Kamala Harris to “send a message”, or just sit the election out (same effect), and do more damage than anything Trump could do if he tried.

    This is Trump doing his art of the deal routine like he’s been doing forever. Sweet feathery Jesus will the midwit gammas on the right clue in already?

    Whatever, Inque. This “art of the deal” shit is useless, especially in the case of someone like Trump who will make a really bad deal just to make a deal. Face it; Trump wasn’t playing 3D chess or making a deal, he was totally out of his depth, behaving like a moron on national TV.

    It may be time for you to face the fact that you’re backing a mongoloid. Another fact to face is that there is no political solution to the current problem with government, at least not with the current political system.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Svigor says:

    Haha…you…idiots…with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you…idiots…are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    I use “guerrilla warfare” to refer, broadly, to fourth generation warfare.

    Dipshits think the USG will gain any advantage from tanks, or guided missiles, etc. They won’t. It’s like talking about how the USG will automatically win in Vietnam and Afghanistan because they have nukes. Stupid.

    Not that air supremacy is nothing, mind you; it’s a big plus tracking tangos.

    If the nitwits here had a clue, they’d be talking about the USG’s digital advantage, not how many tanks they can pile into the Fulda Gap. But they don’t; they’re nitwits.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  150. Realist says:

    “National Question, every current political alternative to Trump is far worse.”

    Exactly and that is why our country is doomed. Even if an excellent candidate came along who would finance him/her? The Deep State will never allow this country to be governed. for the masses

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  151. Svigor says:

    “Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.”

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    Saw this dangling dingleberry hanging off you crap pile of a post. Come on, be specific, stupid, so we can really see how stupid you are. Tell us all about how teh Mytee US gubbmint is gonna use MBTs on US soil against…who? The guy who they say is a terrorist, but who denies it and has no weapons or military equipment in his house? This isn’t Iraq, you moron. The USG can’t just order a city evacuated and then bomb the crap out of it on the assumption that anyone left is an insurgent (for one thing, American insurgents will all leave with the civilian population, like they’ve got 2 brain cells to rub together).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  152. Svigor says:

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.

    You dumb fuck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.
     
    That's true enough - deep states with effective intelligence services are good at propaganda and picking off individual dissidents, but get into trouble when the violence is too visible. The best example is probably Ceaușescu's Romania.

    Securitate:


    In the 1980s, the Securitate (Deep State) launched a massive campaign to stamp out dissent in Romania, manipulating the country's population with vicious rumors (such as supposed contacts with Western intelligence agencies), machinations, frame-ups, public denunciations, encouraging conflict between segments of the population, public humiliation of dissidents, toughened censorship and the repression of even the smallest gestures of independence by intellectuals. ..... Assassinations were also used to silence dissent.
     
    And how it ended:

    As anti-government protesters demonstrated in Timișoara in December 1989, he (Ceaușescu) perceived the demonstrations as a political threat and ordered military forces to open fire on 17 December, causing many deaths and injuries. The revelation that Ceaușescu was responsible resulted in a massive spread of rioting and civil unrest across the country. The demonstrations, which reached Bucharest, became known as the Romanian Revolution—the only violent upheaval of a communist government in the turn of the Revolutions of 1989. Ceaușescu and his wife, Elena, fled the capital in a helicopter, but were captured by the armed forces after the armed forces changed sides. On 25 December, after being tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide, They were immediately executed by firing squad.
     
    Wikipedia: "Securitate" & "Nicolae Ceausescu"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Svigor says:

    PeterAUS, if we’re dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is “conspiratorial insurgency.” There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    PeterAUS, if we’re dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is “conspiratorial insurgency.” There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.
     
    Oh, I do get you.
    My previous post/comment about "overseas" vs "American" approach to the issue addresses that.

    We are, effectively, talking about two different things here.
    Very, very different.

    To, again, clarify:
    My approach is, a "county level insurrection/whatever". Emphasize on all of the county.
    Well..at least...at least a decent town with surrounding settlements.
    One decent town and several smaller towns even better. In essence, a self-governing entity.

    Two counties even better. Three ...four..more is merrier.
    A state.....perfect. National Guard and such.
    Anyway.

    That entity is on the rise against the State. All of it, from its leadership to the Council toilet cleaner.

    That's the premise I start from in my approach to the true purpose of the 2nd.

    My position is that the insurrection of that type, with available "tools", has a high chance of success.
    With clear political vision (which is the foundation of the insurrection), proper organization, and with at least a week to get ready for a serious confrontation, yes, I believe it would work.
    Of course, there are million variables here, but, that's the gist.

    Your option, well.........haven't thought much about it.
    Make of that what you will.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Svigor says:

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We’re not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.

    Wrong.

    Words, images, memes, and ideas are the only way to convince the people to mount a violent revolution.
    Words, images, memes, and ideas are the only way to convince the people to mount a non-violent revolution.

    Either way, getting the people into a revolutionary state of mind is the only way. This is why I think the people who insist “no way out through non-violent means” are either morons, or fantasists, or establishment trolls offering deliberately counter-productive advice. They’re full of shit, or selling a product.

    We are in a mind-war, period. You can’t have a revolution of any kind until the people have a revolutionary mind-set. We don’t have that yet, so we have to build one. The naysayers are just idiots, trolls, or lazy fucks who don’t want to do the grind work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  155. @Svigor

    If it’s apparent that he’s a troll, why feed him? Trolls don’t stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.
     
    Cuz this is Unz.com and he's gonna get fed. I say, feed this one nothing but shit.

    If you had a clue, you’d know they’re closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There’s a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.
     
    Yeah I'm sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech.

    Rest was TL;DR. You're a dumb fuck.

    “Yeah I’m sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech.”

    As if the unfounded opinion of an ignorant asshole such as yourself should carry any weight.

    “Rest was TL;DR. You’re a dumb fuck.”

    Which is more than enough to show you up, goofball.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Svigor says:

    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren’t full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.

    How much armor, how many tanks and APCs, etc., did the Irish destroy in whupping the Brits’ ass and sending them packing? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that the answer is “zero.” Armor is irrelevant to the discussion. Fighter jets are irrelevant to the discussion. Carrier groups and nuclear subs are irrelevant to the fucking discussion.

    FFS, learn about 4th generation warfare, people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  157. peterAUS says:

    Come on, be specific, stupid, so we can really see how stupid you are. Tell us all about how teh Mytee US gubbmint is gonna use MBTs on US soil against…who? The guy who they say is a terrorist, but who denies it and has no weapons or military equipment in his house? This isn’t Iraq, you moron.

    Well…there is a point there I am afraid.

    MBT is just a tool. In fact, a very versatile and precise tool. Actually, a perfect tool for taking out a serous threat even in MOUT. Takes skills, of course, and careful coordination with other elements, but, tank is the thing for sure.

    How about this (from “overseas” for you):

    A bunch, of say, 20, freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on who’s describing them) attacked a local police station. A local guys from that town, simply got together and whacked the station. A rapid response paramilitary police team got them while retreating with loot. They pinned the police and holed up in a local compound.
    Now, a compound with high stone walls and a couple of stone/concrete buildings, with cellars.
    More police came, made a cordon around. Standoff. Occasional shooting but no moves.
    So…what now?
    Negotiations to surrender won’t work (we aren’t talking about Western justice system here).
    Assault, well, this isn’t Hollywood.
    Waiting them out won’t work either. In fact, while that is going here and focus of the State is here, it is given that the coming night some raid will happen somewhere else.
    Or even get police from behind.
    This needs closing fast. Initiative and such.

    Police chief calls the Army unit close by. The Colonel commanding sets of with two tanks and two APCs (and combat support vehicles, not important).
    A short command brief, quick orders and….tanks roll to point blank range and blast the entrance. Breach done.
    Tanks and APC suppress, with MG fire (with the rest of police/soldiers there) the compound.
    Assault team gets in.
    Tanks get in.
    Another point blank into a house. Assault moves in.
    Another point blank one step ahead of assault. Rinse and repeat.
    Done.

    Well..collateral damage and such, but, that’s it.

    So…it can be done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    Cops with armored vehicles are everywhere these days.

    http://www.ktvz.com/news/officers-in-armored-vehicle-shoot-kill-sherwood-gunman/685242543

    A few weeks ago not far from where I am a poor elderly person couldn't pay the confiscatory property tax anymore for the house he lived in all his life. So the tax claim bureau sold his house at a tax sale. The elderly person refused to leave the house and wouldn't/couldn't pay the new "owner" rent.

    So the cops came with an armored vehicle equipped with a battering ram. As they were approaching the house with the vehicle, the elderly person killed himself.

    But it seems every county now has armored vehicles, and one of the local SWAT team cops showed me the AP ammo he had for his M4. He had several boxes of this stuff:

    https://modernarmsinternational.com/shop/60gr-ap/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @Svigor

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

     

    This is a great example of how gobsmackingly stupid Jonathan Mason is. He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument. He's too stupid to do arithmetic, for God's sake (1 McVeigh = 168 dead feds, 5,000 McVeighs = x dead feds; can you solve for x, children?)

    It's constant face-palm-level stupidity from this complete nincompoop.

    He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument.

    Well, McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls and were all obsessed with conspiracy theories, so they would have fitted right in with many posters on this blog. McVeigh apparently made part of his living selling weapons at gun shows.

    Fortier seems to have gone quiet now, McVeigh was executed, and Nichols is still is prison, but if they were around today they would no doubt be posting the same bile under pseudonyms on the Internet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls

     

    Yeah, if they hadn't had access to guns, they wouldn't have been able to shoot up all those people at the Federal building.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. peterAUS says:
    @Svigor
    PeterAUS, if we're dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is "conspiratorial insurgency." There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.

    PeterAUS, if we’re dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is “conspiratorial insurgency.” There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.

    Oh, I do get you.
    My previous post/comment about “overseas” vs “American” approach to the issue addresses that.

    We are, effectively, talking about two different things here.
    Very, very different.

    To, again, clarify:
    My approach is, a “county level insurrection/whatever”. Emphasize on all of the county.
    Well..at least…at least a decent town with surrounding settlements.
    One decent town and several smaller towns even better. In essence, a self-governing entity.

    Two counties even better. Three …four..more is merrier.
    A state…..perfect. National Guard and such.
    Anyway.

    That entity is on the rise against the State. All of it, from its leadership to the Council toilet cleaner.

    That’s the premise I start from in my approach to the true purpose of the 2nd.

    My position is that the insurrection of that type, with available “tools”, has a high chance of success.
    With clear political vision (which is the foundation of the insurrection), proper organization, and with at least a week to get ready for a serious confrontation, yes, I believe it would work.
    Of course, there are million variables here, but, that’s the gist.

    Your option, well………haven’t thought much about it.
    Make of that what you will.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Svigor says:

    Harold, you ignorant fuck, civilians can buy level 3 and level 4 body armor. Towelheads have been running around in the sandbox wearing it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as I already explained to you, standard issue M855A1 or M80A1 ammo will defeat level 3 body armor, and military issue M995 and M993 AP ammo will defeat level 4 body armor, you ignorant fuck. And there are various manufacturers who make saboted WHA ammo which will also defeat level 4 armor, but only cops and military can buy it, you ignorant fuck.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Svigor says:

    Well, McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls and were all obsessed with conspiracy theories, so they would have fitted right in with many posters on this blog. McVeigh apparently made part of his living selling weapons at gun shows.

    And Nazis and Commies were all gun-grabbers, so they fit right in with you, you stupid fuck.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  162. Svigor says:

    Who doesn’t have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren’t tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    "Who doesn’t have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren’t tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS."

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. It's one thing to make a few pounds of ETN, PETN, RDX, etc., but where will you get it in any quantity?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Svigor says:

    A bunch, of say, 20, freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on who’s describing them) attacked a local police station. A local guys from that town, simply got together and whacked the station. A rapid response paramilitary police team got them while retreating with loot. They pinned the police and holed up in a local compound.

    So don’t get bogged down with loot, like an idiot. Make better escape plans. Hell, attacking a local police station isn’t even a good idea (especially not in places thick with military forces). Local police aren’t your natural enemies, the goal should be to get them to back off and leave it to you and the central gov’t. Bribes, beatings, that’s how to deal with local PDs.

    But, sure, yes, in that limited scenario, a tank is useful. But once a group of insurgents is surrounded, that’s pretty much it, tank or no tank. The goal is not to get surrounded, ever. It would make no sense for the insurgents to send good men after bad in an attempt to take the tank out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  164. @Twodees Partain
    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren't full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.

    I agree that their body armor doesn’t make them invincible. But it’s an advantage they have, and it continues to evolve and improve over time, i.e. more coverage, higher threat level protection and lighter weight. (I’ve seen DOD studies showing that their body armor significantly reduces casualties).

    They also have the new M855A1 and M80A1 ammo which is another advantage. There are a couple of youtubers who got some from gunbroker or somewhere and did some testing. M855A1 seems to be far more “barrier blind” than M855, and leaves a nasty wound channel. I’d really like to get some, but the feds seem to be going out of their way to keep it off the market.

    The ATF tried to ban M855 ammo a few years ago but they failed. I believe they did it not because of M855 per se, but because they were trying to prospectively prevent the introduction of steel (or even tungsten alloy) tipped ammo to the civilian market.

    The law banning AP ammo by its terms bans any bullets with a steel or tungsten heavy alloy (WHA) core, but it doesn’t apply to bullet designs with a steel or WHA tip. And once the army started testing the new bullets and saw how effective they were, the “government” realized that there was a whole class of ammo with a hardened tip which was technically not illegal, so they tried to expand the scope of the ban by a ridiculous construction of the law, but luckily it failed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Svigor says:

    The idea of 4th generation warfare is to level the playing field by hiding among the populace (get that? HIDING?), avoiding the enemy’s strength, hitting him where he’s soft, and slowly bleeding him of resources until he says fuck it, I’d rather strike a deal, concede this shithole territory I hate anyway, and leave. Not get in a bunch of stand-up fights that his military was designed for. Hell, I could easily see a successful insurgency targeting infrastructure exclusively, or almost exclusively, reserving attacks on people for only the softest, juiciest targets (assassinations vs. high-value targets, etc.).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  166. @Svigor
    Harold, you ignorant fuck, civilians can buy level 3 and level 4 body armor. Towelheads have been running around in the sandbox wearing it.

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as I already explained to you, standard issue M855A1 or M80A1 ammo will defeat level 3 body armor, and military issue M995 and M993 AP ammo will defeat level 4 body armor, you ignorant fuck. And there are various manufacturers who make saboted WHA ammo which will also defeat level 4 armor, but only cops and military can buy it, you ignorant fuck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck,
     
    Understatement of the week.

    Note that Svigor actually RHYMES with 'wigger', which is what he is.

    Heh heh heh heh
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Svigor says:

    My position is that the insurrection of that type, with available “tools”, has a high chance of success.

    Yeah, I dunno about that, never given it much thought. It seems to me that where there’s a will, there’s a way. Given the current regime, a State could probably secede using only non-violent means, if it was determined enough. Meaning, as determined as the Irish were; the determination of a people, not an organization or a subculture or a polity, but a people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  168. @Svigor
    Who doesn't have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren't tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS.

    “Who doesn’t have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren’t tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS.”

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as usual, you have no idea what you’re talking about. It’s one thing to make a few pounds of ETN, PETN, RDX, etc., but where will you get it in any quantity?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Wow, just Wow!!!! Mass delusion is rampant in these neck of the woods anymore. Trump is a New Yorker through and through and was openly a Democrat at the turn of the 21st century, then seemed to change as the conservative anger at Obama surged. The guy is the consummate pitch man, especially if he is the product. He got some traction with the birth certificate issue and was the only GOP candidate to actually speak to flyover country’s fears, thus did the impossible. He is a Trojan horse folks, just like GWB was for the most part, as well as Obama. You actually can go back to Bubba as well. Conservatives are frigging losers, because they just want to keep things as they are. Life and history are never static, and that is why radicals usually are the ones that change things(usually for the worse). Question to you. What is actually salvageable with the current political system? All you need is a ton of $$$$$$$$ to get elected anymore and have international finance on your side. The waste of space that we voted for really hasn’t done anything and probably for all purposes has destroyed the GOP for good after all is said and done. I was going to abstain from voting back in November 2016, as both candidates were a total embarrassment to this nation, but the specter of HRC called me into action, thus I voted for the orange haired one. I will never cast a vote again. It is a total waste of time with the current setup and the lineup of bums we have to choose from. If Oprah does run in 2020, I think she has a decent shot. At least she comes off as somewhat respectable. The Twitter in Chief is just too much anymore and too dumb to properly defend himself. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t run in 2020.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  170. peterAUS says:

    Yeah, I dunno about that, never given it much thought.

    Well, that’s very good.
    It means we have a very good exchange of thoughts and ideas here.
    Hail free speech, a?

    It seems to me that where there’s a will, there’s a way.

    Probably true.
    Still, a careful consideration of all variables and scenarios helps where serious topics are concerned.
    Not much error margin, I am afraid, there.

    I guess as an American you have that optimism and self-confidence other people don’t.
    The catch is to balance it with a heavy dose of reality.

    In such cases, I use the method hammered into me as a young man:
    Play………..the……….scenario.
    Even better, do it with a couple of guys; “red” vs “blue”.

    Given the current regime, a State could probably secede using only non-violent means, if it was determined enough.

    Well…….that is the thing, I guess, “resolved” in 1865 at your place.

    Meaning, as determined as the Irish were; the determination of a people, not an organization or a subculture or a polity, but a people.

    Irish 1916 or Irish 1921…a difference.

    I believe that US approach to the subject would be American.
    It would take a more or less culturally homogeneous territorial entity (say, with a clear majority of one ethnic/cultural group) to do that.

    In plain language, it would be seen as “people insurrection” even by the staunchest of opponents.

    Your option, well, easy to define as a “terrorist” cell.
    Taking into account the power of the state at the moment I wouldn’t give those cells much of a future. Survival, perhaps. Success, no.

    That “territorial entity” would be totally another beast.

    And, here we’ve come to the actual examples of all that.
    The funny part I must say. Sorry about that, but it is funny.

    The perfect real example to look up at would be….. get ready, deep breath:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_forces_of_the_war_in_Donbass

    I do know how that sounds for the most of “gun guys” in USA, but, that’s my 2 cents here.

    I am not saying the exact example, of course, but the best real life example with the most quality to learn from.
    At the moment. If/when the regime in Kiev takes them on, even better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Just to add a bit.

    A scenario. A far fetched, probably, but plausible.

    The Government announces something like this:
    "Blah..blah....buy back of AR-15 type of firearms...blah...blah....3 months....blah...blah....After that period illegal....blah...blah".

    Well.....taking into account, apparently, that huge number of guys who are willing to oppose that by force or arms ("cold hands" and such), is it plausible that one US town and surroundings, just one, gets taken over by people who would actually try to oppose that?
    One....only. Not more than 50 000 citizens. In all of the USA.

    Plausible or not?

    If yes, well, my "option" (or that "overseas" option) works.
    If not....well.....what's the point of opposing that move really?
    The huge majority of US citizens doesn't care then. Hence, those who care are small minority.

    As such minority, going against the full power of USA, is simply suicidal.

    Not only that, but, what exactly those would be willing to fight for? For society that doesn't exist anymore, I think.
    Hence, what's their goal then? To overthrow the government, almost impossible (nothing is truly impossible), but then what? Force that very society to remake itself into what they want?
    Well......that sounds a bit........totalitarian, to say the least.

    I think that the "cell" approach belongs to that category I am afraid.

    Can't see it differently.

    Now, all that opens the real interesting issue in all this (as mentioned by one of comments here), but there we, or better Americans, are.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Jonathan Mason

    And somebody wants to take my guns away?

    Come and get them, you bastards.
     

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don't come, we will block the highway!
     
    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hplpQt424Ls

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns…

    …or voting. Let’s be consistent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Masintenn says:

    Don’t despair, Derb! Trump is playing the long game, part of which requires stealing issues from the Dims. Personally, i think it’s genius.

    He offers a dreamer deal….dimms decline.

    He’ll offer some gun control concessions…..dimms will decline. Note that the “take the guns” comment was in relation to mental cases and that law enforcement ALWAYS takes action first then goes to court second.

    At this point, although they don’t realize it, the dimms have lost these issues. Sure, they’ll accuse him of hating alien kids and bowing to the NRA, but the people will see through it.

    Meanwhile, wall prototypes are being built, ICE is stomping on necks, the economy is doing great, we haven’t entered new wars, young conservative judges are being seated, etc.

    And I’m enjoying a hot cup of leftist tears….. all thanks to Donald J Trump!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Sure, they’ll accuse him of hating alien kids...
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnlK8iJONok

    http://www.wral.com/weather/video/16887262/
    , @Authenticjazzman
    Praise the Lord, finally someone who actually realizes what DT is doing, namely playing the game of "give and take" with the leftists, and thereby keeping them off balance and in a state of malaise, and confusion.
    He values the 2nd to the Nth degree, and he will never give in to the demand that it be abolished or watered-down.
    DT is a shrewd, cunning businessman, the precise type of "deal-maker" which the leftist cannot scrutinize or manipulate : give him the benefit of the doubt, as he will not betray his supporters, however he is compelled to engage in the game of two-steps forward, one step back, which is the perfect tactical method to confuse and consternate the one-dimensional leftist dummies.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician ( Last gig : This afternoon)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Dr. X says:
    @Svigor

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?
     
    This is pig-ignorant. History shows Western powers (US very much included) consistently losing guerrilla conflicts over the last century.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.
     
    This is off the mark, too. It's not organization that's lacking, it's will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will "miraculously" materialize, the USG will get its ass handed to it in tatters, and the feds will rush to the negotiating table at C.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).
     
    The lack of will goes in the opposite direction, in this case.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.
     
    EA, you've lost the plot. The American voters have been clawing back their gun rights for the last two decades or so. That's the trend.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.
     
    My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings. The USG doesn't have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a "pre-dawn raid" on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that's wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it's hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I've barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.
     
    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can't think of anything.

    I repeat: there is only one barrier to the USG getting its ass kicked by a popular insurgency: the populace isn't remotely interested in mounting an insurgency. At all.

    You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    You haven’t been paying much attention to the gun-banners, have you? New York and California (60 million residents combined) have completely banned ammo sales outside of licensed retail establishments. We’re not just talking so-called “AP” either (which green tip really is not, unlike, say, .30 cal black tip) — I mean common stuff like .22 LR. Ditto for Washington, D.C., where SWAT will roll and do a no-knock raid for as little as a single 12 gauge shell.

    They’re already implementing ammo bans and magazine bans along with gun bans. You can get seven years in NY for possessing an 11-round magazine.

    A LOT of guys are going to go to bed one night thinking they have Second Amendment rights, and are going to wake up the next morning with nothing but their dicks in their hands if they don’t start paying attention to what’s already been happening.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Just bury your guns out in the middle of nowhere and tell them you sold all of them years ago.
    :-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Yeah, but burying your guns is giving them up. You're just choosing to give them up to whatever random stranger finds them before you come back, instead of to the "authorities".
    , @Truth
    I'm no genius Bro, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a gun?

    Scene: Midnight in a beautiful, mayonaise-white suburb:

    Jane: "Honey, 6 men with automatic rifles, wearing ski masks just jumped out of a van with no liscence plate down the block! They're heading this way! I think it's a home invasion!"

    John: Oh that's fine honey, you and the girls just do what they want, I'm going to grab the pickaxe and shovel and drive out to retrieve the cache in the desert. See you in 2 hours..."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Twodees Partain
    You've never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn't "questionable" at all.

    You’ve never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn’t “questionable” at all.

    How does “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” apply to individuals who implicitly reject that jurisdiction?

    If Wong is right, then Plessy must also be. They were supported and dissented to by the same individual justices.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Joe Franklin

    The Fourteenth Amendment and the Hart-Celler immigration act are far more threatening to our gun rights.

     

    Gotta ask.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    My understanding of the 14th is that it imposed all of the BoR restrictions on the federal government in the constitution, including the 2nd amendment, onto the state governments.

    The 14th guarantees that the state governments can't infringe gun rights too.

    Birth right citizenship is a threat to gun rights, especially as it applies to anchor babies born to illegal alien parents who are inclusive to at least one of the federal protected class groups.

    All federal protected class groups of people are generally leftist and anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

    It's questionable if the 14th protects babies born to illegal aliens in the US.

    How is the 14th amendment threatening to gun rights?

    How do you reconcile “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” with “No free negro or mulatto shall be suffered to possess any firelock…”? How do you get equality between a race that must be armed and one that must not?

    This circle may or not be unbroken, but it will always be unsquared.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @peterAUS

    Come on, be specific, stupid, so we can really see how stupid you are. Tell us all about how teh Mytee US gubbmint is gonna use MBTs on US soil against…who? The guy who they say is a terrorist, but who denies it and has no weapons or military equipment in his house? This isn’t Iraq, you moron.
     
    Well...there is a point there I am afraid.

    MBT is just a tool. In fact, a very versatile and precise tool. Actually, a perfect tool for taking out a serous threat even in MOUT. Takes skills, of course, and careful coordination with other elements, but, tank is the thing for sure.

    How about this (from "overseas" for you):

    A bunch, of say, 20, freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on who's describing them) attacked a local police station. A local guys from that town, simply got together and whacked the station. A rapid response paramilitary police team got them while retreating with loot. They pinned the police and holed up in a local compound.
    Now, a compound with high stone walls and a couple of stone/concrete buildings, with cellars.
    More police came, made a cordon around. Standoff. Occasional shooting but no moves.
    So...what now?
    Negotiations to surrender won't work (we aren't talking about Western justice system here).
    Assault, well, this isn't Hollywood.
    Waiting them out won't work either. In fact, while that is going here and focus of the State is here, it is given that the coming night some raid will happen somewhere else.
    Or even get police from behind.
    This needs closing fast. Initiative and such.

    Police chief calls the Army unit close by. The Colonel commanding sets of with two tanks and two APCs (and combat support vehicles, not important).
    A short command brief, quick orders and....tanks roll to point blank range and blast the entrance. Breach done.
    Tanks and APC suppress, with MG fire (with the rest of police/soldiers there) the compound.
    Assault team gets in.
    Tanks get in.
    Another point blank into a house. Assault moves in.
    Another point blank one step ahead of assault. Rinse and repeat.
    Done.

    Well..collateral damage and such, but, that's it.

    So...it can be done.

    Cops with armored vehicles are everywhere these days.

    http://www.ktvz.com/news/officers-in-armored-vehicle-shoot-kill-sherwood-gunman/685242543

    A few weeks ago not far from where I am a poor elderly person couldn’t pay the confiscatory property tax anymore for the house he lived in all his life. So the tax claim bureau sold his house at a tax sale. The elderly person refused to leave the house and wouldn’t/couldn’t pay the new “owner” rent.

    So the cops came with an armored vehicle equipped with a battering ram. As they were approaching the house with the vehicle, the elderly person killed himself.

    But it seems every county now has armored vehicles, and one of the local SWAT team cops showed me the AP ammo he had for his M4. He had several boxes of this stuff:

    https://modernarmsinternational.com/shop/60gr-ap/

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    I know that.

    I've been watching, with my own eyes, slowly but steady, militarization of police for quite some time now.
    The ..almost sick....situation is that I, as ex-military, have been having problem with that.
    My "chattering class" acquaintances haven't even been registering that. And when I pointed to them they simply didn't care.
    They care for a lost cat. They have masters and PhDs in related matters. And they simply do not register that. The......educated.......elite.

    Besides, one of commentators here already pointed to that: the state will KILL you if you disobey. They'll follow the line of escalation in fast and smooth line.

    But, it's all relative.

    The very same police team/vehicle/tactics wouldn't have worked in different setup.

    Say, that "insurrection" thing.
    Just an isolated farm, concrete walls, cellar. Several persons with firearms.
    It wouldn't have been any charging with the battering ram then.
    But, yes, they'd call the Army if wanting to take that farm out on their way further into the "insurrection territory".
    Tanks..........but even with tanks, if people know what they are doing it wouldn't be a cakewalk. Yes, shell in, assault follows. Who knows what can happen in those 15 seconds on entry? First or second guy down? Both? Precision is a tricky thing.
    Escalate in intense? Frag in with entry on full auto?
    Don't think so, on US soil. Even that has risks for the assault team.
    Escalate further? Thermobarics, regular or improvised ("house guest" from Falujah). On American soil, against American extended family?
    Then, why stop there? Just drop a bomb/missile and obliterate the place.
    Really don't think so.

    The point I've been trying to make in all this topic is very simple: force the Government to go to war against people. A proper war.
    And, something just tells me it wouldn't.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @anarchyst
    The Murrah building was destroyed by government operatives--NOT McVeigh. Not only were there questionable records and activities going on there, a way was needed to defuse the various "militia movements" that were increasing in popularity due to government abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. There is NO WAY that a "fertilizer bomb" could wreak the destruction that the building sustained. In fact, the glass windows of the "water board building" across the street were untouched. There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which "maintenance people" were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt). Of course, they managed to find the truck's axle, undamaged, not unlike the "passports" found in the rubble of the WTC.
    Look how quickly McVeigh was executed, along with emotional non-testimony being allowed in the "kangaroo court" that was McVeigh's "trial".
    Governments are not averse to using innocent civilians as "pawns", murdering them to achieve a political and social objective.
    Look at the school shootings in which "trained law enforcement" (still) sits on their hands until the shooting stops.
    Par for the course...

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained

    The citizens of Bath, Michigan, will politely disagree:

    https://www.biography.com/people/andrew-kehoe-235986


    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    The citizens of Bath, Michigan, will politely disagree

     

    Two story wood building made in the 1800s. See "three little pigs".

    Also note the explosives were planted in the basement:


    ... he had planted hundreds of pounds of dynamite. An experienced electrician, he had served as the district's volunteer handyman and had unfettered access to the building. After months of careful planning...

     

    Bath was an inside job.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Repeat after me. It doesn’t matter what he says. It matters what he does.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  180. @European-American
    First hit in a search for “gun poll”:

    Three-quarters of people polled said gun laws should be stricter than they are today. That's an increase — in a short period of time — from October 2017, when NPR conducted a similar survey in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. Then, 68 percent said gun laws should be stricter than they were.
    https://www.npr.org/2018/03/02/589849342/npr-poll-after-parkland-number-of-americans-who-want-gun-restrictions-grows

     

    Everyone’s got an opinion if you press them. But I bet most people don’t understand why guns are so important to the people here who wail that Trump has betrayed them over guns, and just don’t care that much. Except they’d like not to be shot by nutcases. This is a great opportunity for Trump to appear reasonable and representative of the vast majority of Americans.

    I don’t know Mason or what he usually says. I usually sympathize with what Derb says, and I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction. I’d get a little depressed locked up in Huffpo land.

    … I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction.

    Eviction, hell! If you write too much really stupid stuff here, Ron Unz will get you your own column.
    .
    .

    (I didn’t mean “you” personally, E-A.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    Yeah, I dunno about that, never given it much thought.
     
    Well, that's very good.
    It means we have a very good exchange of thoughts and ideas here.
    Hail free speech, a?

    It seems to me that where there’s a will, there’s a way.
     
    Probably true.
    Still, a careful consideration of all variables and scenarios helps where serious topics are concerned.
    Not much error margin, I am afraid, there.

    I guess as an American you have that optimism and self-confidence other people don't.
    The catch is to balance it with a heavy dose of reality.

    In such cases, I use the method hammered into me as a young man:
    Play...........the..........scenario.
    Even better, do it with a couple of guys; "red" vs "blue".

    Given the current regime, a State could probably secede using only non-violent means, if it was determined enough.
     
    Well.......that is the thing, I guess, "resolved" in 1865 at your place.

    Meaning, as determined as the Irish were; the determination of a people, not an organization or a subculture or a polity, but a people.
     
    Irish 1916 or Irish 1921...a difference.

    I believe that US approach to the subject would be American.
    It would take a more or less culturally homogeneous territorial entity (say, with a clear majority of one ethnic/cultural group) to do that.

    In plain language, it would be seen as "people insurrection" even by the staunchest of opponents.

    Your option, well, easy to define as a "terrorist" cell.
    Taking into account the power of the state at the moment I wouldn't give those cells much of a future. Survival, perhaps. Success, no.

    That "territorial entity" would be totally another beast.

    And, here we've come to the actual examples of all that.
    The funny part I must say. Sorry about that, but it is funny.

    The perfect real example to look up at would be..... get ready, deep breath:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_forces_of_the_war_in_Donbass

    I do know how that sounds for the most of "gun guys" in USA, but, that's my 2 cents here.

    I am not saying the exact example, of course, but the best real life example with the most quality to learn from.
    At the moment. If/when the regime in Kiev takes them on, even better.

    Just to add a bit.

    A scenario. A far fetched, probably, but plausible.

    The Government announces something like this:
    “Blah..blah….buy back of AR-15 type of firearms…blah…blah….3 months….blah…blah….After that period illegal….blah…blah”.

    Well…..taking into account, apparently, that huge number of guys who are willing to oppose that by force or arms (“cold hands” and such), is it plausible that one US town and surroundings, just one, gets taken over by people who would actually try to oppose that?
    One….only. Not more than 50 000 citizens. In all of the USA.

    Plausible or not?

    If yes, well, my “option” (or that “overseas” option) works.
    If not….well…..what’s the point of opposing that move really?
    The huge majority of US citizens doesn’t care then. Hence, those who care are small minority.

    As such minority, going against the full power of USA, is simply suicidal.

    Not only that, but, what exactly those would be willing to fight for? For society that doesn’t exist anymore, I think.
    Hence, what’s their goal then? To overthrow the government, almost impossible (nothing is truly impossible), but then what? Force that very society to remake itself into what they want?
    Well……that sounds a bit……..totalitarian, to say the least.

    I think that the “cell” approach belongs to that category I am afraid.

    Can’t see it differently.

    Now, all that opens the real interesting issue in all this (as mentioned by one of comments here), but there we, or better Americans, are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. You can buy .30 sabots to manufacture your own armor-piercing ammunition using a 5.56mm bullet of your own choice. $14.95/100

    https://www.eabco.net/Accelerator-Type-Sabots-for-30-Caliber-Cartridges-100_p_13645.html

    A legal AP bullet from the USG standpoint could be one constructed from Molybdenum on a lathe; very hard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    I've tried that with a .300 Blackout using those sabots from eabco.

    But just using 5.56 mm bullets won't work any better that say M193 ammo, unless the bullets themselves are "AP".

    My idea, for a start, was to use maraging steel (which is expensive but has excellent physical properties and is fairly easy to harden with the little induction heater I built).

    But before I tried the lathe-turned steel projectiles, I tried 5.56 mm 55 grain FMJ bullets, just to test the sabots by themselves.

    And that's where I encountered the first problem. I couldn't even get on paper at 50 yards.

    I think the problem was the wrong primer and powder combination. I'm going to try again when the weather improves, but it looks like it will not be easy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Smokeless powder can be detonated as a high explosive using the appropriate sized detonators and thus is able to be incorporated into a shaped charge.

    http://guns.connect.fi/gow/nitro.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    I don't know if the owner of this site would want this discussion to go into very much detail on this subject so I'll just keep it general.

    I've seen several research papers where the velocity of detonation (VOD) of various single and double base smokeless powders was tested under various conditions, e.g., confinement, charge diameter, type of initiator (blasting cap or electric match), etc.

    IIRC, under optimal conditions, most of the powders were in the range of 4 to 5 km/sec, but there was one paper that found a VOD for one particular fast burning double base powder to be in the range of 6 to 7 km/sec, but the test setup the authors used in that paper may have introduced some error.

    Anyway, on the page you linked is shown Vhitavuori N310, a fast burning single based (nitrocellulose) powder. The author claims that it works for shaped charges (and that seems plausible, IMO), but he doesn't go into much detail, and the devil is in the details. For example if you stick the detonator into the charge too far, the detonation wave may not be a plane wave when it encounters the liner and that will seriously degrade the performance.

    In general it seems that for maximum effectiveness, both jet-producing and EFP type shaped charges require high VOD explosives, good design and high precision in construction (i.e., uniformity of explosive charge density, accurate placement of the liner, etc.).

    I'm certainly no expert on it but there is some discussion between various people experimenting with it over at sciencemadness and from the results of their experiments it seems that it's not something that you just slap together if you're after decent performance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. peterAUS says:
    @Harold Smith
    Cops with armored vehicles are everywhere these days.

    http://www.ktvz.com/news/officers-in-armored-vehicle-shoot-kill-sherwood-gunman/685242543

    A few weeks ago not far from where I am a poor elderly person couldn't pay the confiscatory property tax anymore for the house he lived in all his life. So the tax claim bureau sold his house at a tax sale. The elderly person refused to leave the house and wouldn't/couldn't pay the new "owner" rent.

    So the cops came with an armored vehicle equipped with a battering ram. As they were approaching the house with the vehicle, the elderly person killed himself.

    But it seems every county now has armored vehicles, and one of the local SWAT team cops showed me the AP ammo he had for his M4. He had several boxes of this stuff:

    https://modernarmsinternational.com/shop/60gr-ap/

    I know that.

    I’ve been watching, with my own eyes, slowly but steady, militarization of police for quite some time now.
    The ..almost sick….situation is that I, as ex-military, have been having problem with that.
    My “chattering class” acquaintances haven’t even been registering that. And when I pointed to them they simply didn’t care.
    They care for a lost cat. They have masters and PhDs in related matters. And they simply do not register that. The……educated…….elite.

    Besides, one of commentators here already pointed to that: the state will KILL you if you disobey. They’ll follow the line of escalation in fast and smooth line.

    But, it’s all relative.

    The very same police team/vehicle/tactics wouldn’t have worked in different setup.

    Say, that “insurrection” thing.
    Just an isolated farm, concrete walls, cellar. Several persons with firearms.
    It wouldn’t have been any charging with the battering ram then.
    But, yes, they’d call the Army if wanting to take that farm out on their way further into the “insurrection territory”.
    Tanks……….but even with tanks, if people know what they are doing it wouldn’t be a cakewalk. Yes, shell in, assault follows. Who knows what can happen in those 15 seconds on entry? First or second guy down? Both? Precision is a tricky thing.
    Escalate in intense? Frag in with entry on full auto?
    Don’t think so, on US soil. Even that has risks for the assault team.
    Escalate further? Thermobarics, regular or improvised (“house guest” from Falujah). On American soil, against American extended family?
    Then, why stop there? Just drop a bomb/missile and obliterate the place.
    Really don’t think so.

    The point I’ve been trying to make in all this topic is very simple: force the Government to go to war against people. A proper war.
    And, something just tells me it wouldn’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Masintenn
    Don't despair, Derb! Trump is playing the long game, part of which requires stealing issues from the Dims. Personally, i think it's genius.

    He offers a dreamer deal....dimms decline.

    He'll offer some gun control concessions.....dimms will decline. Note that the "take the guns" comment was in relation to mental cases and that law enforcement ALWAYS takes action first then goes to court second.

    At this point, although they don't realize it, the dimms have lost these issues. Sure, they'll accuse him of hating alien kids and bowing to the NRA, but the people will see through it.

    Meanwhile, wall prototypes are being built, ICE is stomping on necks, the economy is doing great, we haven't entered new wars, young conservative judges are being seated, etc.

    And I'm enjoying a hot cup of leftist tears..... all thanks to Donald J Trump!

    Sure, they’ll accuse him of hating alien kids

    http://www.wral.com/weather/video/16887262/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Proggy logic.

    Evolution stopped 10,000 yrs ago, and there are no significant differences among races. Indeed, races don’t even exist, and we are all the same. We are just like people 10,000 yrs ago, and no amount of divergences in geography, diet, and mating patterns made any difference among humanity. Whether Nigerian, Swede, Russian, Arab, Chinese, Mexican native, or Amazonian Indian, we are all the same.

    For some reason, humanity became immutable and unchangeable since 10,000 yrs ago.

    AND YET…

    you can mutate from a man to a woman if you put on a wig, a dress, and say your penis and balls are female organs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  187. Only way people will be civilized if we forge back plows into swords, and throw away all nukes and shooting things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Oh, you mean like back in the days of Genghis Khan and Attila. Yeah, that's the ticket.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. Miro23 says:
    @Svigor
    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency's ranks would swell by millions in short order.

    You dumb fuck.

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.

    That’s true enough – deep states with effective intelligence services are good at propaganda and picking off individual dissidents, but get into trouble when the violence is too visible. The best example is probably Ceaușescu’s Romania.

    Securitate:

    In the 1980s, the Securitate (Deep State) launched a massive campaign to stamp out dissent in Romania, manipulating the country’s population with vicious rumors (such as supposed contacts with Western intelligence agencies), machinations, frame-ups, public denunciations, encouraging conflict between segments of the population, public humiliation of dissidents, toughened censorship and the repression of even the smallest gestures of independence by intellectuals. ….. Assassinations were also used to silence dissent.

    And how it ended:

    As anti-government protesters demonstrated in Timișoara in December 1989, he (Ceaușescu) perceived the demonstrations as a political threat and ordered military forces to open fire on 17 December, causing many deaths and injuries. The revelation that Ceaușescu was responsible resulted in a massive spread of rioting and civil unrest across the country. The demonstrations, which reached Bucharest, became known as the Romanian Revolution—the only violent upheaval of a communist government in the turn of the Revolutions of 1989. Ceaușescu and his wife, Elena, fled the capital in a helicopter, but were captured by the armed forces after the armed forces changed sides. On 25 December, after being tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide, They were immediately executed by firing squad.

    Wikipedia: “Securitate” & “Nicolae Ceausescu”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23
    Video of events in Romania 1989

    https://youtu.be/HFBnP1HQ7rQ
    , @Twodees Partain
    Good points, and also the main point stands that Romanians were mostly disarmed. The "armed forces" were made up of Romanians, just as the US military is made up of Americans, for the most part. The hard core SF units will have some psychopaths in their ranks who will welcome "getting some trigger time" at the expense of their fellow Americans, but many, even among the SF, will balk at fighting civilians.

    Just as Congress is somewhat divided over civilian disarmament, so is the military (and police forces) divided over who will be seen as the enemy in a civil war, and likely to a greater extent than the political class.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Thomm says:
    @Harold Smith
    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as I already explained to you, standard issue M855A1 or M80A1 ammo will defeat level 3 body armor, and military issue M995 and M993 AP ammo will defeat level 4 body armor, you ignorant fuck. And there are various manufacturers who make saboted WHA ammo which will also defeat level 4 armor, but only cops and military can buy it, you ignorant fuck.

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck,

    Understatement of the week.

    Note that Svigor actually RHYMES with ‘wigger’, which is what he is.

    Heh heh heh heh

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    LOL.

    A "White Nationalist Wigger?"

    (Tillie, Aldey, holla!)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. Miro23 says:
    @Miro23

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.
     
    That's true enough - deep states with effective intelligence services are good at propaganda and picking off individual dissidents, but get into trouble when the violence is too visible. The best example is probably Ceaușescu's Romania.

    Securitate:


    In the 1980s, the Securitate (Deep State) launched a massive campaign to stamp out dissent in Romania, manipulating the country's population with vicious rumors (such as supposed contacts with Western intelligence agencies), machinations, frame-ups, public denunciations, encouraging conflict between segments of the population, public humiliation of dissidents, toughened censorship and the repression of even the smallest gestures of independence by intellectuals. ..... Assassinations were also used to silence dissent.
     
    And how it ended:

    As anti-government protesters demonstrated in Timișoara in December 1989, he (Ceaușescu) perceived the demonstrations as a political threat and ordered military forces to open fire on 17 December, causing many deaths and injuries. The revelation that Ceaușescu was responsible resulted in a massive spread of rioting and civil unrest across the country. The demonstrations, which reached Bucharest, became known as the Romanian Revolution—the only violent upheaval of a communist government in the turn of the Revolutions of 1989. Ceaușescu and his wife, Elena, fled the capital in a helicopter, but were captured by the armed forces after the armed forces changed sides. On 25 December, after being tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide, They were immediately executed by firing squad.
     
    Wikipedia: "Securitate" & "Nicolae Ceausescu"

    Video of events in Romania 1989

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @Harold Smith
    I think you misunderstand. When Trump fired those cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn't know what the consequences would be, nor did he apparently care. With that one reckless act he not only became a mass murderer, but he could've started WW3 and for what, exactly?

    If someone raped and killed a girl in the past, would you give the murderer the "benefit of the doubt" and let your daughter date the guy? I bet you wouldn't.

    I think he had a pretty good idea of what the consequences were. All US presidents kill. It goes with the job. It seems naïve not to acknowledge that. Or a double standard. Are you not aware that US policy has claimed innocent lives every year since the US was founded? It’s a sad, but apparently inevitable fact related to being a powerful nation in a violent world.

    To paraphrase the old joke, we have already established what kind of man a president is. Now we are just haggling over policy choices. It’s too early to tell if Trump’s body count will equal Bush’s or even Obama’s. I hope he is smart and lucky enough that it will be lower.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    It absolutely doesn't "go with the job" for any morally competent person. Why is it so hard for some people to differentiate between legitimate self-defense and immoral crimes of aggression?

    If a private person in this society treated other people the way the U.S. "government" treats people in other countries (and increasingly, people in the U.S.), that person would be institutionalized or executed.

    I don't have any moral right to kill you and steal your wallet, right? If I got together with another person, we wouldn't have any moral right to rob and kill you. Even if 1000 of us got together we still wouldn't have any right to use violence against you. So where does the U.S. "government" get the supernatural authority to mass-murder people all over the world?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. I agree, in principle, with the concept of dumping Trump; this has been clear to me not long into his presidency. Trump has pretty much cucked on everything he committed to during his election campaign and in his inaugural speech.
    But what is the alternative? Do you know of any national figure who is honest, intelligent AND patriotic who could replace him AND want the job?

    How do we save Trumpism from Trump? Let’s think about this first and in the meantime SPEAK UP.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    I'm going to encourage Steve King (Republican House Member from Iowa) to run against Trump in 2020.
    , @Twodees Partain
    True, Altan. If Trump is dumped in the 2020 campaign, there may be a chance at getting someone better. If Trump is removed before his term is up, we'll end up with Pence, who is as much the AntiTrump as Hillary, just a little different cosmetically.

    Who knows, maybe Trump will convert to Trumpism, though Trumpism is alien to his nature.
    , @freebird
    Well people like you could always demand the Obama run again -------- in you're la la land he is a viable alternative. And he accomplished oh so much in his almost decade in office on the economy, gun control, illegal immigration etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Svigor
    These are comments from people who have lost the plot and are replying to Jonathan Mason as if he is mentally competent:

    Lemurmaniac #6
    Stripes Duncan #110

    These are comments from people who are properly dismissive of Jonathan Mason, but still don't really understand that he is a moron who needs to be subjected to megadoses of vitriol and constant attacks on his room temperature IQ:

    Ok then #8
    Jenner Ickham Errican #24
    jacques sheete #30
    Achmed E. Newman #35

    Fred On Nothing (#46) is in a class of his own; he actually thinks JM is a Jew, a group known for their above average intelligence and capacity for argument, something that is strongly contra-indicated in JM's comments.

    Gentlemen, please stop treating this retard like a competent citizen in good standing. He's probably posting from a mental institution, or a halfway house, or his caretaker's smart phone.

    He's a complete asshat. A fool. A buffon. A clown. An idiot. A retard. A nincompoop. A dummy. A simpleton. A cretin. A moron. A dummkopf. An ass. A ninny. A dullard. A mongoloid. A half-wit. A dullard. An ignoramus. An imbecile. A mental mendicant.

    Is this sinking in?

    C'mon guys, get it together already.

    Yes, I know Mason’s an idiot; his ‘reasoning’ as such is nonexistent. He’s also a troll, but an earnest troll in the sense that I think he truly believes in the positions he takes. I don’t address him out of anger, hence my lack of vitriol (I rarely get mad on the internet)—but I do enjoy mocking crap reasoning (and syntax) if the person deserves it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    I am surprised at you Jenn-Erick, I thought you were one of the more intelligent posters here, but perhaps not. I guess when you run with the sheep for long enough you start to think that "two legs bad, four legs good" is a witty comment

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio--McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don't think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular "school shooter drills" at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are "bad people" who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don't be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people's business.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Its actually getting pretty boring watching the fools injure themselves jumping off the Trumptrain every time our reality TV star president says something to the Fake News cameras. Its almost as if some people refuse to learn anything despite watching the same lesson time after time after time. Try imaging that Trump is the president of the United States, that this is an election year, and that not all voters have the same opinions as you. Then watch Trump tell the cameras that he supports everyone’s position. Wake me up when the Republican controlled Congress puts a gun control bill on Trump’s desk in an election year.

    Also, if Trump’s so dumb, how has he has accomplished so much more than you?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  195. @Altan Goldman
    I agree, in principle, with the concept of dumping Trump; this has been clear to me not long into his presidency. Trump has pretty much cucked on everything he committed to during his election campaign and in his inaugural speech.
    But what is the alternative? Do you know of any national figure who is honest, intelligent AND patriotic who could replace him AND want the job?

    How do we save Trumpism from Trump? Let's think about this first and in the meantime SPEAK UP.

    I’m going to encourage Steve King (Republican House Member from Iowa) to run against Trump in 2020.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Oh, so a random nobody senator is receiving the encouragement of the #319,887th rated internet blogger?

    OK, tell his wife to start selecting White House Christmas decorations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @redmudhooch
    Just bury your guns out in the middle of nowhere and tell them you sold all of them years ago.
    :-)

    Yeah, but burying your guns is giving them up. You’re just choosing to give them up to whatever random stranger finds them before you come back, instead of to the “authorities”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Only way people will be civilized if we forge back plows into swords, and throw away all nukes and shooting things.

    Oh, you mean like back in the days of Genghis Khan and Attila. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Miro23

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.
     
    That's true enough - deep states with effective intelligence services are good at propaganda and picking off individual dissidents, but get into trouble when the violence is too visible. The best example is probably Ceaușescu's Romania.

    Securitate:


    In the 1980s, the Securitate (Deep State) launched a massive campaign to stamp out dissent in Romania, manipulating the country's population with vicious rumors (such as supposed contacts with Western intelligence agencies), machinations, frame-ups, public denunciations, encouraging conflict between segments of the population, public humiliation of dissidents, toughened censorship and the repression of even the smallest gestures of independence by intellectuals. ..... Assassinations were also used to silence dissent.
     
    And how it ended:

    As anti-government protesters demonstrated in Timișoara in December 1989, he (Ceaușescu) perceived the demonstrations as a political threat and ordered military forces to open fire on 17 December, causing many deaths and injuries. The revelation that Ceaușescu was responsible resulted in a massive spread of rioting and civil unrest across the country. The demonstrations, which reached Bucharest, became known as the Romanian Revolution—the only violent upheaval of a communist government in the turn of the Revolutions of 1989. Ceaușescu and his wife, Elena, fled the capital in a helicopter, but were captured by the armed forces after the armed forces changed sides. On 25 December, after being tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide, They were immediately executed by firing squad.
     
    Wikipedia: "Securitate" & "Nicolae Ceausescu"

    Good points, and also the main point stands that Romanians were mostly disarmed. The “armed forces” were made up of Romanians, just as the US military is made up of Americans, for the most part. The hard core SF units will have some psychopaths in their ranks who will welcome “getting some trigger time” at the expense of their fellow Americans, but many, even among the SF, will balk at fighting civilians.

    Just as Congress is somewhat divided over civilian disarmament, so is the military (and police forces) divided over who will be seen as the enemy in a civil war, and likely to a greater extent than the political class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    The hard core SF units will have some psychopaths in their ranks who will welcome “getting some trigger time” at the expense of their fellow Americans, but many, even among the SF, will balk at fighting civilians.
    Just as Congress is somewhat divided over civilian disarmament, so is the military (and police forces) divided over who will be seen as the enemy in a civil war, and likely to a greater extent than the political class.
     
    Congressmen do what they're told, and the indicated enemy are the "Deplorables" + Trump supporters in general. The military and Homeland Security are doing it for the money, but there's a difference between targeting Islamic radicals in Afghanistan and bombing regular Americans like themselves in their own towns.

    OK, they're going to be really well paid and live separate from the population + be indoctrinated with the "Domestic Terrorism" narrative, but I basically don't see them having any love for their Zionist/Globalist/SJW leaders, and if they see the tide turning, they'll probably be the be the first to go AWOL.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Altan Goldman
    I agree, in principle, with the concept of dumping Trump; this has been clear to me not long into his presidency. Trump has pretty much cucked on everything he committed to during his election campaign and in his inaugural speech.
    But what is the alternative? Do you know of any national figure who is honest, intelligent AND patriotic who could replace him AND want the job?

    How do we save Trumpism from Trump? Let's think about this first and in the meantime SPEAK UP.

    True, Altan. If Trump is dumped in the 2020 campaign, there may be a chance at getting someone better. If Trump is removed before his term is up, we’ll end up with Pence, who is as much the AntiTrump as Hillary, just a little different cosmetically.

    Who knows, maybe Trump will convert to Trumpism, though Trumpism is alien to his nature.

    Read More
    • Disagree: freebird
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Joe Stalin
    You can buy .30 sabots to manufacture your own armor-piercing ammunition using a 5.56mm bullet of your own choice. $14.95/100

    https://www.eabco.net/Accelerator-Type-Sabots-for-30-Caliber-Cartridges-100_p_13645.html

    A legal AP bullet from the USG standpoint could be one constructed from Molybdenum on a lathe; very hard.

    I’ve tried that with a .300 Blackout using those sabots from eabco.

    But just using 5.56 mm bullets won’t work any better that say M193 ammo, unless the bullets themselves are “AP”.

    My idea, for a start, was to use maraging steel (which is expensive but has excellent physical properties and is fairly easy to harden with the little induction heater I built).

    But before I tried the lathe-turned steel projectiles, I tried 5.56 mm 55 grain FMJ bullets, just to test the sabots by themselves.

    And that’s where I encountered the first problem. I couldn’t even get on paper at 50 yards.

    I think the problem was the wrong primer and powder combination. I’m going to try again when the weather improves, but it looks like it will not be easy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. @Alden
    Some departments are ok.

    For instance 150 years ago counterfeiting was rampant. The secret service cracked down and its almost non existent. Farmers appreciate the agriculture department. It does all sorts of helpful things.

    FAA makes flying safer than trains and car travel. Social Security administers the only pension system not subject to destruction by corporate raiders and the Wolves of Wall St.

    The crown jewel of the federal government is the national parks and the people who work in them.

    The rest might have some useful function but I can’t think of any right now.

    HUD needs to go. dept of education and EEOC need to go and all present past and employees sent to the gulag. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to go and all present and past employees sent to the gulag.

    I’m sure there are some other useful federal departments but can’t think of any.

    I still think that they are all incompetent, and that all of them operate outside their own boundaries. Here’s a really big big problem: these departments and their agencies can issue regulations that have the force of law.

    They aren’t even part of the legislative branch, but they can send federal agents to your house to enforce some regulation that you don’t even know exists. They can make a natural herb that you use instead of an expensive medication illegal with the stroke of a pen and without even announcing the ban.

    That makes them dangerous, especially since they are made up of do-nothing fuckoffs, but they are also led by political appointees who are out to advance their own influence and feather their own nests via salaries and retirement benefits.

    Of course these welfare queen farmers love them some DoA and the checks they get for not planting this or that. That doesn’t make the department competent or even legal under the constitution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. freebird says:

    Yes by all means if you want to hold onto you’re guns then dump Trump and go with Hillary or Bernie. Or some other left-wing wacko. That would be a very smart move and would prove you’re point. Sort of like saying that Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  203. KenH says:

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    “A well regulated state and local police force and national guard, being necessary to the monopoly of force over the people by state and federal government, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as long as they are members of said local, state or federal police forces, shall not be infringed. Private ownership of firearms may be exercised subject to strict guidelines set forth by elected representatives in conjunction with the ADL, SPLC, World Jewish Congress, CNN, cat ladies and university SJW’s and may be rescinded at any time for any reason.”

    They also say the second amendment only covers guns in service at the time it was written in the 18th century which means DHS, FBI and all state and local police forces must destroy their high tech weaponry and utilize only muzzle loading long guns and flintock pistols with black powder ball ammo.

    Using this shitlib and Jew logic, only those who exercise freedom of speech using dip pens and iron gall ink on parchment or hemp paper are legally protected under the first amendment since those were tools of writing used at the time the Constitution was ratified. The use of any other tool or medium to express oneself other than those specified are subject to arrest and hate crime charges since you would need a permit from government to express thoughts they may not like.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    on parchment or hemp paper
     
    hemp papers - Check.
    , @Jonathan Mason

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:
     
    Actually what I see is some archaic language written by the in-power politicians of the time as a kind of manifesto, some of which is highly relevant today and other parts of which are not so much.

    It is largely a knockoff of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which was published 2 years earlier.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

    It has always been a struggle to understand exactly what was meant and what the Founders anticipated. For example was birthright citizenship intended to clarify the status of former slaves, or was it intended to encourage birth tourism? What exactly did the Founders think about self-driving stagecoaches?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. freebird says:
    @Altan Goldman
    I agree, in principle, with the concept of dumping Trump; this has been clear to me not long into his presidency. Trump has pretty much cucked on everything he committed to during his election campaign and in his inaugural speech.
    But what is the alternative? Do you know of any national figure who is honest, intelligent AND patriotic who could replace him AND want the job?

    How do we save Trumpism from Trump? Let's think about this first and in the meantime SPEAK UP.

    Well people like you could always demand the Obama run again ——– in you’re la la land he is a viable alternative. And he accomplished oh so much in his almost decade in office on the economy, gun control, illegal immigration etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. anarchyst says:
    @European-American
    First hit in a search for “gun poll”:

    Three-quarters of people polled said gun laws should be stricter than they are today. That's an increase — in a short period of time — from October 2017, when NPR conducted a similar survey in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. Then, 68 percent said gun laws should be stricter than they were.
    https://www.npr.org/2018/03/02/589849342/npr-poll-after-parkland-number-of-americans-who-want-gun-restrictions-grows

     

    Everyone’s got an opinion if you press them. But I bet most people don’t understand why guns are so important to the people here who wail that Trump has betrayed them over guns, and just don’t care that much. Except they’d like not to be shot by nutcases. This is a great opportunity for Trump to appear reasonable and representative of the vast majority of Americans.

    I don’t know Mason or what he usually says. I usually sympathize with what Derb says, and I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction. I’d get a little depressed locked up in Huffpo land.

    If you trust ANY mainstream media poll, my friend, you are delusional. The way a question is presented has a direct impact on the polling response. For example, if the question asked is: “Are you against gun violence?” Most people will answer “yes”. The polling organization and its sponsors will then declare that the responses are “proof” that most people favor gun control.
    Polling organizations cannot be trusted.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. @Joe Stalin
    Smokeless powder can be detonated as a high explosive using the appropriate sized detonators and thus is able to be incorporated into a shaped charge.

    http://guns.connect.fi/gow/nitro.html

    I don’t know if the owner of this site would want this discussion to go into very much detail on this subject so I’ll just keep it general.

    I’ve seen several research papers where the velocity of detonation (VOD) of various single and double base smokeless powders was tested under various conditions, e.g., confinement, charge diameter, type of initiator (blasting cap or electric match), etc.

    IIRC, under optimal conditions, most of the powders were in the range of 4 to 5 km/sec, but there was one paper that found a VOD for one particular fast burning double base powder to be in the range of 6 to 7 km/sec, but the test setup the authors used in that paper may have introduced some error.

    Anyway, on the page you linked is shown Vhitavuori N310, a fast burning single based (nitrocellulose) powder. The author claims that it works for shaped charges (and that seems plausible, IMO), but he doesn’t go into much detail, and the devil is in the details. For example if you stick the detonator into the charge too far, the detonation wave may not be a plane wave when it encounters the liner and that will seriously degrade the performance.

    In general it seems that for maximum effectiveness, both jet-producing and EFP type shaped charges require high VOD explosives, good design and high precision in construction (i.e., uniformity of explosive charge density, accurate placement of the liner, etc.).

    I’m certainly no expert on it but there is some discussion between various people experimenting with it over at sciencemadness and from the results of their experiments it seems that it’s not something that you just slap together if you’re after decent performance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Rbel says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    Smart people are saying that the root causes of mass shootings are things like fatherless homes and similar cultural changes.

    The recent Florida shooting appears to have been facilitated by a PC program that prevented that particular fatherless, technically Hispanic shooter from having the criminal record that would have prevented him from buying his gun(s).

    We already have all the gun laws we need, but we are doing everything to prevent ourselves from enforcing them.

    Trump stumbles in mysterious ways, and this latest flub will fade away as all of his do. There will be no elimination of due process just because Donny said something stupid, and that's all that matters.

    We have precious few "like-minded friends" in or anywhere near positions of power, so "we are doomed" anyway, but why abandon our one-and-only life raft in the meantime?

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer. The term shooter is used by the left to downplay the culpability of the murderer and turn it toward the gun itself. A person target shooting at the range is a shooter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.
     
    Gunman would be better.
    , @Buzz Mohawk
    Your request is to:

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.
     
    Fine. Okay.

    I see and understand your point, and I agree with you about the Left's tactics. However:

    Pardon me for making that particular error, but we are talking about "mass shootings," are we not? It is precisely the forces arrayed against us who would like us to turn away from guns. We will not. How can one begin a comment about a mass shooting without talking about the shooter?

    I thought we here were above being hurt by words. It is the Left that gets all bent out of shape when we call one of their pets something they don't deem appropriate.

    The murderer shot those people. He didn't run over them with a truck or stab them, which would have been just as deadly. The topic here is mass shooters, not mass murderers. We are strong enough in our understanding to know that the crime is murder, not shooting.

    Whatever. That "Hispanic" dude ejaculated some lead at those kids and gosh darn murdered a mass of 'em.

    If he'd had a father and had grown up in a society that still respected men, he probably wouldn't have ever wanted to do that. If he hadn't been coddled by anti-white racist policies, he would've had a criminal record and never been able to buy anything to shoot with, um, excuse me, I mean "mass murder" with.

    He probably would have used an axe.

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9-g9BtuftA4/SlxOWc9IAyI/AAAAAAAAAEs/nrNZLBNboQo/s400/axe-murderer.jpg
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

     

    How about "massacre of the un-armed in a gun-free zone"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. @KenH
    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    "A well regulated state and local police force and national guard, being necessary to the monopoly of force over the people by state and federal government, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as long as they are members of said local, state or federal police forces, shall not be infringed. Private ownership of firearms may be exercised subject to strict guidelines set forth by elected representatives in conjunction with the ADL, SPLC, World Jewish Congress, CNN, cat ladies and university SJW's and may be rescinded at any time for any reason."

    They also say the second amendment only covers guns in service at the time it was written in the 18th century which means DHS, FBI and all state and local police forces must destroy their high tech weaponry and utilize only muzzle loading long guns and flintock pistols with black powder ball ammo.

    Using this shitlib and Jew logic, only those who exercise freedom of speech using dip pens and iron gall ink on parchment or hemp paper are legally protected under the first amendment since those were tools of writing used at the time the Constitution was ratified. The use of any other tool or medium to express oneself other than those specified are subject to arrest and hate crime charges since you would need a permit from government to express thoughts they may not like.

    on parchment or hemp paper

    hemp papers – Check.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Yes, I know Mason’s an idiot; his ‘reasoning’ as such is nonexistent. He’s also a troll, but an earnest troll in the sense that I think he truly believes in the positions he takes. I don’t address him out of anger, hence my lack of vitriol (I rarely get mad on the internet)—but I do enjoy mocking crap reasoning (and syntax) if the person deserves it.

    I am surprised at you Jenn-Erick, I thought you were one of the more intelligent posters here, but perhaps not. I guess when you run with the sheep for long enough you start to think that “two legs bad, four legs good” is a witty comment

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    ... but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.
     
    See, this is what I meant whether I questioned whether you were possibly a woman commenter about a week back. It's all emotional to you. I! GET! THAT! LADY! [/Carlson]

    Why don't you stay out of Floridian's and American's business about defending the principles that this nation was founded on? "Shall not be infringed", get it? I told you it's not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking. You haven't learned anything, so I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    I think you should take 10 minutes or a couple of hours (if including the comments) to read Mr. Fred Reed's superb editorial from last week, which gets to the root of the problem. It's not the guns.


    So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.
     
    The men are looking at the big picture. Your daughters are indeed at some risk, albeit extremely slight, of another nut-case purposely let by any system of mental health shooting or blowing things up at a school*. I'd like to know what you think is a greater risk: What I just wrote, or that of a totalitarian state completing it's transition, with your daughters and your grandchildren living miserable lives like those lived under 20th-century Communism in Russia, Red China, and E. Bloc counties? BIG PICTURE STUFF - it's not your mode of thinking, but it's necessary.

    FUCK YOU, MASON - We're keeping the guns and we're proud to say so. Go back to England it you don't like it. Let the men run things here.

    .
    .

    * Mandatory government 13-year propaganda camps schools are part of the problem too. Have you considered homeschooling?

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.
     
    Well that’s the crux of it, isn’t it? Who’s getting into whose business? I’m sure you, me, and everyone agrees on officially identifying lunatics/criminals like the Parkland killer early on and at least prohibiting them from legal ownership of any gun. But unless I’m misinterpreting your comments on this matter, you advocate further restricting or banning ARs and other semi-auto rifles from legal civilian ownership in general. I disagree.

    Regarding theoretical armed opposition to government authority, there’s no need to fixate on past boogeymen like McVeigh—the relatively recent Bundy standoff is far more germane to analyses of civilians using firearms (ultimately peacefully, in this case) to resist perceived government overreach. I’m no authority on the legalities of the initial land-use dispute, but I do know that a group of armed citizens convinced a group of at least equally heavily-armed federal and local officers to back down and release Cliven Bundy’s cattle.

    Wikipedia:

    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that tensions reached a “critical level” during the standoff, “with rifles pointing toward each side.” Las Vegas station KLAS-TV also reported that guns were pointed at officers.

    Assistant Sheriff Lombardo recounted that “they were in my face yelling profanities and pointing weapons,” and said, “We were outgunned, outmanned, and there would not have been a good result from it.”

    Las Vegas Metro Deputy Chief Tom Roberts defused the situation by announcing that Bundy's cattle would be returned within 30 minutes. The BLM announced that it would suspend the mass roundup, citing safety reasons.

    Clark County Sheriff Gillespie mediated the agreement between the Bundy family and the BLM, saying, “[W]hen a group of protesters threaten civil unrest or violence in this county — it is my job to step in and ensure the safety of citizens.”

    BLM Director Neil Kornze said that “Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.”
     
    As of this date, Bundy and sons are free and their cattle is still grazing on ‘prohibited’ federal land.

    Best clip on YouTube of the pivotal confrontation:

    https://youtu.be/bD61YFxUga4?t=8s
    , @RadicalCenter
    Look, people actually defend themselves, their families, their homes, their businesses, and their neighbors every day with legally purchased and owned firearms.

    My own sister saved herself from rape and maybe even worse, merely by pulling out her handgun. Against those two “men”, my short and slightly built sister otherwise would have had no chance.

    And I don’t know a single gun rights activist or just gun owner who has ever blocked traffic or threatened anyone in any way aggressively. Neither do you.

    But she and the rest of us must just be “playing soldier” with our numerous guns, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. @Rbel
    Please stop using the term "shooter" to describe a mass murderer. The term shooter is used by the left to downplay the culpability of the murderer and turn it toward the gun itself. A person target shooting at the range is a shooter.

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    Gunman would be better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman


    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.
     
    Gunman would be better.

     

    Yeah, like Timothy McVeigh, right?
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    C'mon, it's 2018. Gunperson.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @European-American
    I think he had a pretty good idea of what the consequences were. All US presidents kill. It goes with the job. It seems naïve not to acknowledge that. Or a double standard. Are you not aware that US policy has claimed innocent lives every year since the US was founded? It's a sad, but apparently inevitable fact related to being a powerful nation in a violent world.

    To paraphrase the old joke, we have already established what kind of man a president is. Now we are just haggling over policy choices. It's too early to tell if Trump's body count will equal Bush's or even Obama's. I hope he is smart and lucky enough that it will be lower.

    It absolutely doesn’t “go with the job” for any morally competent person. Why is it so hard for some people to differentiate between legitimate self-defense and immoral crimes of aggression?

    If a private person in this society treated other people the way the U.S. “government” treats people in other countries (and increasingly, people in the U.S.), that person would be institutionalized or executed.

    I don’t have any moral right to kill you and steal your wallet, right? If I got together with another person, we wouldn’t have any moral right to rob and kill you. Even if 1000 of us got together we still wouldn’t have any right to use violence against you. So where does the U.S. “government” get the supernatural authority to mass-murder people all over the world?

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @KenH
    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    "A well regulated state and local police force and national guard, being necessary to the monopoly of force over the people by state and federal government, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as long as they are members of said local, state or federal police forces, shall not be infringed. Private ownership of firearms may be exercised subject to strict guidelines set forth by elected representatives in conjunction with the ADL, SPLC, World Jewish Congress, CNN, cat ladies and university SJW's and may be rescinded at any time for any reason."

    They also say the second amendment only covers guns in service at the time it was written in the 18th century which means DHS, FBI and all state and local police forces must destroy their high tech weaponry and utilize only muzzle loading long guns and flintock pistols with black powder ball ammo.

    Using this shitlib and Jew logic, only those who exercise freedom of speech using dip pens and iron gall ink on parchment or hemp paper are legally protected under the first amendment since those were tools of writing used at the time the Constitution was ratified. The use of any other tool or medium to express oneself other than those specified are subject to arrest and hate crime charges since you would need a permit from government to express thoughts they may not like.

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    Actually what I see is some archaic language written by the in-power politicians of the time as a kind of manifesto, some of which is highly relevant today and other parts of which are not so much.

    It is largely a knockoff of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which was published 2 years earlier.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

    It has always been a struggle to understand exactly what was meant and what the Founders anticipated. For example was birthright citizenship intended to clarify the status of former slaves, or was it intended to encourage birth tourism? What exactly did the Founders think about self-driving stagecoaches?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Amendment 14 was written after the War of Northern Aggression, in the late 1860's. It was not written by the Founding Fathers.

    I am repeating from lots of great comments here, but what did the Founders think of the internet, Mason - Covered by Amendment I, or not covered? Or, am I being too obtuse for you?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @Jonathan Mason

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.
     
    Gunman would be better.

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    Gunman would be better.

    Yeah, like Timothy McVeigh, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Jonathan Mason
    I am surprised at you Jenn-Erick, I thought you were one of the more intelligent posters here, but perhaps not. I guess when you run with the sheep for long enough you start to think that "two legs bad, four legs good" is a witty comment

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio--McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don't think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular "school shooter drills" at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are "bad people" who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don't be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people's business.

    … but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.

    See, this is what I meant whether I questioned whether you were possibly a woman commenter about a week back. It’s all emotional to you. I! GET! THAT! LADY! [/Carlson]

    Why don’t you stay out of Floridian’s and American’s business about defending the principles that this nation was founded on? “Shall not be infringed”, get it? I told you it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking. You haven’t learned anything, so I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    I think you should take 10 minutes or a couple of hours (if including the comments) to read Mr. Fred Reed’s superb editorial from last week, which gets to the root of the problem. It’s not the guns.

    So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

    The men are looking at the big picture. Your daughters are indeed at some risk, albeit extremely slight, of another nut-case purposely let by any system of mental health shooting or blowing things up at a school*. I’d like to know what you think is a greater risk: What I just wrote, or that of a totalitarian state completing it’s transition, with your daughters and your grandchildren living miserable lives like those lived under 20th-century Communism in Russia, Red China, and E. Bloc counties? BIG PICTURE STUFF – it’s not your mode of thinking, but it’s necessary.

    FUCK YOU, MASON – We’re keeping the guns and we’re proud to say so. Go back to England it you don’t like it. Let the men run things here.

    .
    .

    * Mandatory government 13-year propaganda camps schools are part of the problem too. Have you considered homeschooling?

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    .... it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking
     
    Yup.

    I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.
     
    He is not a troll. I do appreciate his input here. It is very good.
    He is a perfect example of "chatering class". The "cosmpolitan literate". An excellent tool for TPTB.
    I really suggest re-reading :

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.
     
    That is what they really FEEL, think and want. And they'll go for it all the way they can.

    They just don't get it.

    They are the product of modern society. And that is the thing here.
    The modern society produces them faster than it produces people into the "2nd".
    Add immigration and, that's the game.
    Demographics. Democracy. Elections. LAWS. And the power of the state to effect those laws.
    They don't mind it. They actually need it.

    They simply do not have that into them.

    It takes an extraordinary event/events to change their mindset. No amount of talk or reasoning will do that.

    Know your enemy. Or, at least, know its foot soldiers. The "chattering class".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Jonathan Mason

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:
     
    Actually what I see is some archaic language written by the in-power politicians of the time as a kind of manifesto, some of which is highly relevant today and other parts of which are not so much.

    It is largely a knockoff of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which was published 2 years earlier.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

    It has always been a struggle to understand exactly what was meant and what the Founders anticipated. For example was birthright citizenship intended to clarify the status of former slaves, or was it intended to encourage birth tourism? What exactly did the Founders think about self-driving stagecoaches?

    Amendment 14 was written after the War of Northern Aggression, in the late 1860′s. It was not written by the Founding Fathers.

    I am repeating from lots of great comments here, but what did the Founders think of the internet, Mason – Covered by Amendment I, or not covered? Or, am I being too obtuse for you?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Truth says:
    @Thomm

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck,
     
    Understatement of the week.

    Note that Svigor actually RHYMES with 'wigger', which is what he is.

    Heh heh heh heh

    LOL.

    A “White Nationalist Wigger?”

    (Tillie, Aldey, holla!)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Truth says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    I'm going to encourage Steve King (Republican House Member from Iowa) to run against Trump in 2020.

    Oh, so a random nobody senator is receiving the encouragement of the #319,887th rated internet blogger?

    OK, tell his wife to start selecting White House Christmas decorations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. “Macho” Derbyshire is mewling again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  219. peterAUS says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    ... but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.
     
    See, this is what I meant whether I questioned whether you were possibly a woman commenter about a week back. It's all emotional to you. I! GET! THAT! LADY! [/Carlson]

    Why don't you stay out of Floridian's and American's business about defending the principles that this nation was founded on? "Shall not be infringed", get it? I told you it's not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking. You haven't learned anything, so I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    I think you should take 10 minutes or a couple of hours (if including the comments) to read Mr. Fred Reed's superb editorial from last week, which gets to the root of the problem. It's not the guns.


    So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.
     
    The men are looking at the big picture. Your daughters are indeed at some risk, albeit extremely slight, of another nut-case purposely let by any system of mental health shooting or blowing things up at a school*. I'd like to know what you think is a greater risk: What I just wrote, or that of a totalitarian state completing it's transition, with your daughters and your grandchildren living miserable lives like those lived under 20th-century Communism in Russia, Red China, and E. Bloc counties? BIG PICTURE STUFF - it's not your mode of thinking, but it's necessary.

    FUCK YOU, MASON - We're keeping the guns and we're proud to say so. Go back to England it you don't like it. Let the men run things here.

    .
    .

    * Mandatory government 13-year propaganda camps schools are part of the problem too. Have you considered homeschooling?

    …. it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking

    Yup.

    I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    He is not a troll. I do appreciate his input here. It is very good.
    He is a perfect example of “chatering class”. The “cosmpolitan literate”. An excellent tool for TPTB.
    I really suggest re-reading :

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

    That is what they really FEEL, think and want. And they’ll go for it all the way they can.

    They just don’t get it.

    They are the product of modern society. And that is the thing here.
    The modern society produces them faster than it produces people into the “2nd”.
    Add immigration and, that’s the game.
    Demographics. Democracy. Elections. LAWS. And the power of the state to effect those laws.
    They don’t mind it. They actually need it.

    They simply do not have that into them.

    It takes an extraordinary event/events to change their mindset. No amount of talk or reasoning will do that.

    Know your enemy. Or, at least, know its foot soldiers. The “chattering class”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    And.....there is something else.

    Haven't we noticed a conspicuous absence, in this ...ahm...discussion here, the "Team Russia" and ,apart from "Miro23", people from Asia and the 3rd world in general?
    They do comment all over the place but not on this thread.

    And that is just, how to put it, hilarious.

    They, I am sure, just read all this and snicker. Their own "chattering class" that is.
    Because they, in those places, oh, they know exactly this thing inside out.

    It's only the Western "chattering class".

    Can anyone imagine an educated Russian urban elite feeling along the same lines?
    Or Chinese?
    Or...hahahaha...oh man, this hurts...Balkans people? Like, say, PhDs in humanities from Sarajevo?
    Try, please, to find those types and ask them about the issue. See how it goes.

    And that's the core of the problem.

    Just a thought.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    .... it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking
     
    Yup.

    I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.
     
    He is not a troll. I do appreciate his input here. It is very good.
    He is a perfect example of "chatering class". The "cosmpolitan literate". An excellent tool for TPTB.
    I really suggest re-reading :

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.
     
    That is what they really FEEL, think and want. And they'll go for it all the way they can.

    They just don't get it.

    They are the product of modern society. And that is the thing here.
    The modern society produces them faster than it produces people into the "2nd".
    Add immigration and, that's the game.
    Demographics. Democracy. Elections. LAWS. And the power of the state to effect those laws.
    They don't mind it. They actually need it.

    They simply do not have that into them.

    It takes an extraordinary event/events to change their mindset. No amount of talk or reasoning will do that.

    Know your enemy. Or, at least, know its foot soldiers. The "chattering class".

    And…..there is something else.

    Haven’t we noticed a conspicuous absence, in this …ahm…discussion here, the “Team Russia” and ,apart from “Miro23″, people from Asia and the 3rd world in general?
    They do comment all over the place but not on this thread.

    And that is just, how to put it, hilarious.

    They, I am sure, just read all this and snicker. Their own “chattering class” that is.
    Because they, in those places, oh, they know exactly this thing inside out.

    It’s only the Western “chattering class”.

    Can anyone imagine an educated Russian urban elite feeling along the same lines?
    Or Chinese?
    Or…hahahaha…oh man, this hurts…Balkans people? Like, say, PhDs in humanities from Sarajevo?
    Try, please, to find those types and ask them about the issue. See how it goes.

    And that’s the core of the problem.

    Just a thought.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. JMcG says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    All true Doc, but I would hope (and never would ask) that he's got guns that are not known about. That's why even the instant background-check system is way too onerous for lots of us. Anyone who knows anything about computers/software knows that the data on your check is not just "gone". There is no such thing as it being gone.

    People in charge of it won't admit it, but NICS is a low-level registration system, or at least a look-back type. You'll only hear about it when it's time for it to start being regularly used for this purpose.

    The cntrl-left keeps pushing and pushing. Most are useful idiots for the cause, like some, ahem, I've heard from lately, but the ones on the top know how this is supposed to end. I think they're mistaken this time.

    Regarding my last paragraph, promotion of handguns for self-defense has been a great thing for enlightening the young people. The fact that many people need guns for this reason is not a good thing in and of itself, but they may come around to understanding the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment a lot quicker as they respect guns, are not wetting their panties about them, and hang around with the older crowd how have the guns for reasons of