Skip to comments.Carlton chief, sergeant face firearms charges (BATF now persecuting local police)
Posted on 10/19/2003 12:41:47 AM PDT by fire_eye
click here to read article
The alarm that went out was "the Regulars are coming". Meaning the regular army. It was the colonists own army which was being used to confiscate civilian arms. Citizens of Boston were forced to disobey the order to turn in their weapons and had to smuggle them out of the occupied city in order to keep them.
It was not the firing of the regular's guns which raised the alarm, but several mounted riders including Paul Revere.
You can bet if our army is ever instructed to confiscate the arms of civilians, the army will have every weapon known to man at their service. You and I may not have silencers, machine guns, helicopters, or anti-tank missiles, but the forces sent to tyrannize us will have all this and much more.
This is the BATFE here. They don't have much use for the truth, nor much aquaintence with it either. I'm not sure they'd know what it was if it bit them in the a$$.
And that would be?
Like the BATFags at Waco?
incapable of handling said weapon
Like many women police officers?
mentally incapacitated beyond the point where they could be trusted to control their 'fire' (mentally incompetent - can't judge proper from improper use of weaponry that can potentially kill)
See Waco again.
d) deemed to be a risk because of their 'criminal bent'"
Like the SOB who murdered a woman carrying a child in her arms at Ruby Rudge.
Yeah, I guess there are some folks who shouldn't have guns.
Many, if not most, in the American military take their oath to defend the Constitution seriously. I'd also bet that the higher the 'skill' level of the soldier, the more likely they are to support the Constitution and refuse to obey any illegal edicts to violate the Bill of Rights.
You and I may not have silencers, machine guns, helicopters, or anti-tank missiles
Should such an illegal edict come down the pipe, I would guess that a lot of these items would either mysteriously disappear, or suddenly have "reliability" problems.
There are still quite a few Patriots in the American military.
No, it's not a federal crime, so long as you have the proper paperwork filled out and you've paid your tax.
The only reason they passed that edict was to raise revenue for the state. It needs to be repealed, as the 2nd amendment doesn't give the government the power to regulate silencers.
There were a lot of Republicans (as well as a few democrats) that talked about pulling their funding in 1994 after they won Congress, but the Bush/Dole wing of the party stopped that.
If that day ever comes, a decent bolt action rifle equipped with a scope is all many Patriots will "need".
I certainly did. Nevertheless, it was military tanks at Waco that injected CS gas into the buildings. If you tell enough lies and demonize the "enemy" you can get even well-meaning soldiers to support the wrong side.
It is in Finland. At some ranges, it's mandatory. The German military even has mufflers for artillery pieces. They are the size of largish storage shed, and I don't know how well they work, but I read about them in one of the European defense technology publications about 8 years ago.
It' a little more complicated than that. Their regulations (not the law, just their regulations) define any gun, which means any receiver, that was once a machine gun as a machine gun. That's the main reason all, well most the Navy still uses theirs, the M-14s haven't been distributed through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. They are select fire, and even with the select fire parts removed, even if "removed" means ground off the receiver, BATFE considers them to be machine guns, which the subjects are not allowed to possess. There is some RUMINT going aroudn that CMP and BATFE have come to some sort of agreement on that would allow the M-14s to have their recievers modified so that without welding and machine work, they could not be converted back to select fire, and thus sold through CMP. If so, and I stress it's RUMINT, I want one. All the CETMEs, FN/FALs, G-3s and any other "battle rifles" that have been imported must be fitted with a new receiver before the rest of the parts (a kit) can be assembled into a functioning semi-auto firearm. Even then they have to use a certain number of US made parts beside the reciever, due to the Bush I non-sporting purpose import ban and the subsequent codifying into law of the gist of that ban.
Actually not, they passed a $200 tax on a $15 (or thereabouts) suppressor because they didn't want thee or me to have one. $200 bucks was big money in 1934. They did it that way because they knew darn good and well they had no authority to ban such items, but they did have the power to tax, so they used it. Their model was the Harrison narcotics act, wherein they did the same to various herbs and plant extracts, again, knowing full well they had no power to ban them. (Since such keeping and using such herbs and plant extracts is not explictly protected by the Constitution, state governments may very well have had to the power to ban or severly regulate them, but not the feds, see the ninth amendment) Since then the Supreme Court has ruled that a constutionally protected right may not be singled out to be the object of such a tax, even one much less onorous than that laid out in the Federal Firearms Act. The particular case involved newsprint, IIRC. The same is true of keeping and bearing arms. The 1934 "tax" on machine guns, short barrelled shotguns, short rifles, suppressors, and other stuff was of course only the first slice of the salami, or if you prefer when the first turned on the flame, just a little one, under that pot of boiling water with the frog(s) in it.
The tanks belonged to the military, but the crews were FBI. There were however trained, poorly, by the military under the "war on drugs" exception to the posse commitatus act.
Well, it's actually $200 every time the thing changes hands. As I indicated earlier, in 1934, $200 might has well have been $2,000,000 for the vast majority of people.
Your post might as well have come from Handgun Control Inc. The 2nd Amendment states that the right to bear ARMS shall not be infringed. Rocket launchers and thermonuclear devices are not arms. Gun grabbers are very fond of using such scare tactic comarisons.
As for the rest of your points, if someone is too dangerousa to be trusted with a firearm, they should not be out on the streets, as if they really want to kill, they'll find a way.
You drug warriors have been showing your true colors quite a bit in the last few days.
I give up; what is it?
"It's a lot to have over your head," said Whalon, who has been a police officer for 12 years. "When you've gone all your life being the good guy, and all of a sudden you're the suspect, that can be draining,"
Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot doesn't it officer ?
That something may be used for evil is hardly a reason to ban it. This sort of thinking leads to official paranoia: Government officials trying to track purchases of the two most common chemicals used in agriculture, fertilizer and diesel.
Tearing up a deadbold is going to make a lot of noise no matter what. Besides, firing at hardened steel may earn the invader more than he bargained for anway.
It all started with the matter of a little $200 excise tax that the government now in large part refuses to collect. That in itself is telling as to which party is acting in good faith and which is fraudulent.
My conclusions are that the JBTs initiated the firing at the Davidians and continued to fire into a building they knew contained women and children. The latter cannot be disputed, and I believe the former to be true since the gov't has not proven otherwise.
They could have arrested Koresh at any time they wanted. Instead, they wanted to launch a high-profile attack where they slammed women and children to the ground, and could brag afterwards about all the guns and ammo they seized, as Congressmen licked their boots and voted to give them more funding.
Vernon Wayne Howell had a death wish that he carried out. TO the detriment of those innocent people under his 'care' I might add.
I guess we'll never know since he was murdered by the feds. Or do you believe that he just happened to commit suicide and murder his followers at the exact instance that the tanks rolled in?
Furthermore, if the federales believed him to be that dangerous, why didn't they simply pick him up during one of his daily trips into town?
Either way, they screwed the pooch (commiting numerous crimes in the process), and got away with it.
You, sir, are 100% correct.
My understanding is that the military guys that were there got very pissed off once they found out the feds had lied to them. So only a few of them remained to make sure the feds didn't lose their equipment. I think the feds, not the military, operated the tanks. But I could be very wrong, as all of this is based on stuff I've read elsewhere.
I'm with you 100%.
My point was simply that should the 'enemies of the Constitution' issue an illegal edict and attempt to have the miltary unlawfully carry it out, the "latest and greatest" equipment won't be necessary to defeat them.
In many cases, grandpa's bolt action deer rifle would suffice.
Or at least a few hundred thousand or a million of them.