What happens if gun ownership is not enough?

[Trooper]

You miss the point. That stated rule is "no politics, no religion." In stereotyping Muslims, you transgressed that.

If the rule is suspended, I will be most happy to discuss the genetics, biblical exegesis, and stereotypes.

However we are not discussing religion. Instead the point is that Muslims, as an ethic group, tend to band together far more than most gun owners do. In that aspect, it might be wise for us to learn from them. It might be time for gun owners to give up being individuals and start networking. Also to live closer together. That way we have those who guard our back. And we gain political power.

[Nukes]

IF anyone made such a "stick together" stereotype about a certain other religion and the Second Amendment, the usual suspects would be shrieking and rending their garments.

I am all in favor of decent people with objectively good values (such as Second Amendment defense of innocent life) sticking together and watching each other's backs. The suggestion stands alone and requires no antisemitic stereotyping of Muslims to make the point.

If good people did "stick together," would that be a "conspiracy"? If people talked about good people "sticking together," would such discussions be 'conspiracy theory"?

[some humor injected]

[bwaites]

First, there was no discussion of religion, there was a point made about a particular group who makes decisions that provide for almost instantaneous backup under most circumstances. The point had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with associating closely with those with similar beliefs. The point could be made about Chinatown, Irish neighborhoods, Little Italy, etc.

Unfortunately, the very independence that made America great works against such groups. We all like to do things OUR way, not like someone else might do it.

Nukes, you appear to want to find a religious or political issue, and this is simply not the place. The thread was started directly about the 2A, and has essentially stayed on that path, except for your posts complaining about supposed infractions.

Let me do my job, please. I see no significant deviation so far, leave it alone.

[bwaites]

Under the law, we are not allowed to have neighborhoods that have any form of ethic unity. If a church, as an example, would try to purchase the properties around them so that they could sell only to their members, they would be sued by the local EEOC. Yet there are Muslim only neighborhoods.

So the question is how to get around the laws so that we could have like minded neighborhoods.

Not necessarily, but you would have to be very careful in how you do it.

Here's one option:

http://www.iiicitadel.com/

[Nukes]

You didn't laugh at my joke about 'conspiracy.'

[TheOTHERmaninblack]

At the risk of initiating a s**tstorm, I have to point out that "conservatives" have no more in common with hard core libertarians than they do with hard core leftists. As such, urging that we "forget our differences" and team up for our common goals is a fool's errand. We don't exactly HAVE common goals.

Yes, there are areas of intersection. There are areas of intersection with the leftists, though they are smaller.

A Tea Party movement sort of thing is the one avenue that I think we have to use those areas of overlay. The Tea Party brought disparate groups together based on a single point of shared interest, ignoring the differences. I think that's about all the conservatives, neocons, libertarians, free-staters, classical liberals, et al, can hope for by way of cooperation. The left ruthlessly culls the outliers, where our outliers simply take their balls and go home. But the left is (by the very nature of its adherents) able to capture a much larger portion of their pool, while we individualists tend to take more of an all or nothing view-- which is why we're losing.

Anybody who wants to argue libertarianism with me (A former libertarian) take it to IM, please, and don't futz up the thread.

[bwaites]

At the risk of initiating a s**tstorm, I have to point out that "conservatives" have no more in common with hard core libertarians than they do with hard core leftists. As such, urging that we "forget our differences" and team up for our common goals is a fool's errand. We don't exactly HAVE common goals.

Yes, there are areas of intersection. There are areas of intersection with the leftists, though they are smaller.

A Tea Party movement sort of thing is the one avenue that I think we have to use those areas of overlay. The Tea Party brought disparate groups together based on a single point of shared interest, ignoring the differences. I think that's about all the conservatives, neocons, libertarians, free-staters, classical liberals, et al, can hope for by way of cooperation. The left ruthlessly culls the outliers, where our outliers simply take their balls and go home. But the left is (by the very nature of its adherents) able to capture a much larger portion of their pool, while we individualists tend to take more of an all or nothing view-- which is why we're losing.

Anybody who wants to argue libertarianism with me (A former libertarian) take it to IM, please, and don't futz up the thread.

Which is exactly my point. Trying to lump conservatives, (the real kind, not the RINO kind), and Libertarians won't work.

The only way that I see anything work is IF conservatives, Tea Partiers, Libertarians, free staters, etc. get behind an agenda of small government and a return to Constitutional government. That means getting them all to agree that there will be no diversion from restoring a small government, as envisioned by the Framers of the Constitution. Unless that happens, we won't have any political success on any front. And I fear that we are far past that point.

Using the Second Amendment as a rally point MIGHT be a strong enough siren call to do that, but I doubt it. There are far too many "live and let live" neo-cons, Libertarians, etc. that do not feel that the 2nd Amendment is the defender of all the rest. They do not understand and do not believe that democracy has always worked if, and only if, there is a threat to those in Government from the citizens. IF the Government does not fear the citizens, then the only possible result is increasing bureacracy and eventually totalitarianism.

OK, thats actually too much politics away from the 2nd Amendment.

HOWEVER, I am willing to allow this thread to take on some organic shape IF, and only IF, we can stick to how we can emerge from this dark time. That means we need to develop and propose solutions, not bitch and moan!

NO attacking others, no name calling, no "its THEIR fault". At this point its ALL our fault, and unless we change something, we will surely get what we deserve!

[davidj]

Not necessarily, but you would have to be very careful in how you do it.

Here's one option:

http://www.iiicitadel.com/

Just don't drink the Kool-Aid.

[Trooper]

Not necessarily, but you would have to be very careful in how you do it.

Here's one option:

http://www.iiicitadel.com/

Now how to do within a very leftwing city like Chicago, SF, NYC. We are seeing more and more evangelicals planting churches but that is a drop in the bucket if we want to build 2A support in the upper East Coast (one third of the population lives there).

And how do we go about getting gun owners, often libertarians, to work together? The Tea Party was a very good start as many libertarians would not trust a mainstream party but joined this movement. There is power in numbers and with organization.

[Nukes]

While this video may be a complete put on, my friends who struggle uphill to actually teach in the public fool system assure me the video is representative:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...RkFDcX_72c

How then does one place hope in men for the RKBA, "sticking together," or anything?

[davidj]

It is like "Jaywalking". Incredibly sad situation. Just think...these people get to vote for the president!

[bwaites]

Now how to do within a very leftwing city like Chicago, SF, NYC. We are seeing more and more evangelicals planting churches but that is a drop in the bucket if we want to build 2A support in the upper East Coast (one third of the population lives there).

And how do we go about getting gun owners, often libertarians, to work together? The Tea Party was a very good start as many libertarians would not trust a mainstream party but joined this movement. There is power in numbers and with organization.

The Northeast, with the possible exception of the "Live Free or Die!" state of New Hampshire, is a lost cause. They have made their decisions over the past several decades and I don't think anything can be done to change their mind until after the economic situation plays out. Free state sheriffs are pointing out already that their budgets are strained, they are laying off peace officers, and that people need to be willing to protect themselves. That will never play in the Northeast.

The South and the West, (minus Colorado and California) along with some of the midwestern states like the Dakotas, are the only real hope to maintain our rights. Colorado MIGHT be a swing state, as the citizens there are waking up to what has happened, and starting to demand recalls of their representatives that voted for gun control. However, like most states, their metropolitan areas and their rural areas are starkly opposed in viewpoint, and the metro areas decide policy. Eastern Washington and the areas outside the Seattle/Tacoma metroplex have so far been able to keep enough votes that gun laws have not been changed. Western Oregon, arond the Portland/Salem metro areas, is also heavily leaning liberal, but the state gun laws have been stable. Idaho, Utah, Arizona are very gun friendly and I don't think that will change.

If you live in California or the Northeast, as well as the eastern midwest, you are in trouble, with a few exceptions.

WE need a central issue to unite us, and so far it hasn't been the Constitution!

[Nukes]

One wonders how being the designated locus of the "Continuity of Government" (now that is a euphemism) will affect Colorado's submission to gun bans. Judging from the gun bans in and near the banksters' colonies on the Hudson and Potomac seems a poor prognostic indicator for the RKBA in Colorado.

[BjornF16]

I think the main issue has been complacency. The more conservatives and libertarians wake up, the more they resist and lobby against the lunacy of the anti-gunners. One of the ways my family has resisted the indoctrination of the leftist anti-2A (and other political issues) is to avoid public education.

While some have knocked the effectiveness of communicating with your legislators, I believe it can be effective particularly in the last few years where we have seen recalls of various legislators (like what is happening in CO now).

More people like the vet/LEO who speak up in front of their legislators (like the video Bwaites posted earlier in this thread), the more attention legislators will pay.

Some portions of the country are lost (perhaps permanently, perhaps temporarily); other portions are 2A strongholds (at least for now).

As we said in the military, "complacency kills" (in this sense, kills the ideals of the Republic as predicted by Benjamin Franklin).

[Deer Hunter]

I think the main issue has been complacency. The more conservatives and libertarians wake up, the more they resist and lobby against the lunacy of the anti-gunners. One of the ways my family has resisted the indoctrination of the leftist anti-2A (and other political issues) is to avoid public education.

While some have knocked the effectiveness of communicating with your legislators, I believe it can be effective particularly in the last few years where we have seen recalls of various legislators (like what is happening in CO now).

More people like the vet/LEO who speak up in front of their legislators (like the video Bwaites posted earlier in this thread), the more attention legislators will pay.

Some portions of the country are lost (perhaps permanently, perhaps temporarily); other portions are 2A strongholds (at least for now).

As we said in the military, "complacency kills" (in this sense, kills the ideals of the Republic as predicted by Benjamin Franklin).

And you were right just as Ben Franklin was when he said "You have a Republic if you can keep it." He knew as did the majority of our Forefathers did that our Govt would take these rights from us. They have to be rolling over in their graves!

[XcountryRider]

Anti 2A laws are a means to an end. Not the end objective. The large plans require the citizens to be disarmed to pull off. The commies have been burrowing into government since the 30's but even in power they can't go as far as they like with a armed constitutional republic. If that sounds crazy to you then you need to start a serious plan of self education. Here's a couple starter books. Your going to need to reprogram your thinking after decades on media propaganda. If you don't understand your enemy your just going to be a single issue voter without understanding the larger context to what is going on and has been going on for decades. To understand whats going on now you need to first understand what went on then. Its all connected.

Stalin's Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt's Government

The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors

Target: Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton

Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight against America’s Enemies

Operation Snow: How a Soviet Mole in FDR’s White House Triggered Pearl Harbor

The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor

[LR1955]

Anti 2A laws are a means to an end. Not the end objective. The large plans require the citizens to be disarmed to pull off. The commies have been burrowing into government since the 30's but even in power they can't go as far as they like with a armed constitutional republic. If that sounds crazy to you then you need to start a serious plan of self education. Here's a couple starter books. Your going to need to reprogram your thinking after decades on media propaganda. If you don't understand your enemy your just going to be a single issue voter without understanding the larger context to what is going on and has been going on for decades. To understand whats going on now you need to first understand what went on then. Its all connected.

Stalin's Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt's Government

The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors

Target: Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton

Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight against America’s Enemies

Operation Snow: How a Soviet Mole in FDR’s White House Triggered Pearl Harbor

The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor

XCR:

'Reprogram' your thinking from what to what?

Who is the 'enemy we don't understand'?

What is 'going on now', 'went on then', and what makes you think we who are reading this don't already know?

This is sounding more and more like a conspiracy. Of course, "None Dare call it Conspiracy" would probably be the response.

You are right though. Tyrants must have a disarmed and docile public in order to become tyrannical.

That said, why not state your theory plainly and then cite your evidence?

And, perhaps more importantly, do you believe that you have any control over the outcome?

[montana]

I have read some of the books he mentioned. I plan to read some more on his list. The why and how is where we have gotten off tract when some members get hurt feelings, anger and then locked out posts. What may be legitimate cause and effects for one may be an embarrassing hurtful nutty conspiracy theory for others. I love to sit down and discuss history and politics with people because I don't take it personally. Prove me wrong and I will agree with you is the way I operate. Unfortunately many don't function the same way. You asked some questions and I'm sure nukes and myself could get into another lively discussion answering them, that is why I put LOL on my post, it was directed more at myself than at you. My family is waiting to go to the range so I better go, have a good one LR1955 and I'll catch you later.

[Trooper]

Has anyone read the book "Bowling Alone"? The author covers the concept that the WW2 generation lost faith with the American Puritan Ethic (children of the Depression and young men of WW2). Thus after the war they did not bring their children, the Baby Boomers, to their lodge meetings or otherwise introduce them to the social functions that they belonged to. The Baby Boomers in turn rejected American Puritan Ethic and most over everything else as they saw their parents as hypocrites who said one thing but behaved in another. Thus a 1000 years of Western wisdom was thrown away.

The Baby Boomers are not joiners. We see that in our various social organizations. Most lodges are dead, the Freemasons are the only one really surviving. Soldiers do not join the Legion or VFW. We are a nation of loners with no one that we can trust. And this gets reflected in our politics.

Maybe it is time to join groups. Become a Freemason, go to church, be a precinct committeeman in a political party. Network and build alliances. Learn to trust others and have them learn to trust you. It is harder to take out someone with friends than it is a loner.

[Trooper]

Montana:

Not this time. The discussion involves techniques used by opponents of the 2d Amendment and how supporters should respond. I think XCR is bringing up the subject of tyrants needing a disarmed public.

The problem is that I am not sure what XCR is saying because he didn't state his opinion. And no one here is about to read five or six books in order to figure out what he is trying to say.

If XCR says that the Communist party is alive and well in the USA but they must have a disarmed and docile public to succeed in turning the USA into a Socialist utopia like the USSR, I won't argue with him or anyone else.

So, I am not getting into it or going off track. Just asking him to state his point.

LR1955

A tyrant does not not need to disarm the public, only those who are his enemies, those he demonizes. A tyrant can use the mob to his advantage. He does not need a professional army or police force. He just needs mob rule. Vigilantes can do far more destruction than can the professionals. What good are your guns if you neighbors turn against you? If the whole community refuses to sell you anything or even talk to you?