Skip to comments.
Freedom's Last Stand Are You Willing To Fight for Your Guns?
Guns n Ammo ^
| September 1994
| Stephen Weaver
Posted on 11/08/2002 2:51:35 PM PST by Enemy Of The State
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
To: enfield
are they insinuating that you should bring them in for show and tell?
Comment #22 Removed by Moderator
To: Saundra Duffy
Some women in California are forced to commit civil disobedience by carrying a concealed weapon.How about everyone in New York except people like Don Imus? If you're not connected, you don't carry legally.
23
posted on
11/08/2002 7:29:26 PM PST
by
nygoose
To: God is good
In U.S. vs Miller, the opinion of the court was, generally speaking, that all adult males are in the militia and all adult males have the constitutional right to own an M-16. The court ruled against Miller merely on a technicality -- that Miller's sawed-off shotgun was not a weapon normally used by the military (Miller was not present, nor was his legal counsel. The court relied on the federal government's untruthful arguments). The court never questioned Miller's claim that he was in the militia, nor did it question his right to keep and bear military style weapons.
Miller, by the way, was not a part of any organized militia, National Guard, or military. I believe he was a bootlegger. But Miller had argued, to a lower court, that he was in the militia, and the sawed-off shotgun was his 'militia' weapon. The lower court agreed with him.
To: PhilipFreneau
I always thought the militia to be the legally armed men and now women in the state. And the liberals got me so confussed, I don't even know what I mean by "legally" any more. I just assume, if someone's allowed to live anywhere, he should be able to defend himself just like everyone else and if he's too unruly, just make him leave till he can behave himself. Why take a man's safety away for punching some big mouth bully in the nose 20 years ago?
To: Enemy Of The State
Simple question for the gun-grabbers:
Are you prepared to kill me or die to take my guns? Because I'm prepared to kill you --or anyone you send-- or die to keep them.
To: *bang_list
Bang
To: BCR #226
It's my understanding the Assault Weapons Bill will sunset IF nothing is done. It doesn't have to go to committee unless they don't want to sunset it. Also other provisions can be added to it at that time. Is this correct?
To: enfield
the people at my daughter's high school advised us that we should get "all the firearms out of your home".Good advice, actually, since shooting inside the house is hard on the furniture.
daughter starts homeschool monday. f*ck 'em.
The single best thing you'll probably ever do. I know, I homeschool my son. Congatulations.
To: Shooter 2.5
This is true but be aware that some 'rat will likely try to sneak it in as a rider on another bill. That way, it bypasses the committee in which ever house it comes up in.
Mike
30
posted on
11/11/2002 5:57:14 AM PST
by
BCR #226
To: Jarhead_22
Are you prepared to kill me or die to take my guns?Yes they are prepared to order you killed to take your guns.
Ruby Ridge and Waco come to mind.
31
posted on
11/11/2002 6:09:20 AM PST
by
ASA Vet
To: Saundra Duffy
Some women in California are forced to commit civil disobedience by carrying a concealed weapon.Perhaps they ascribe to the old saying: "I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6."
To: 45Auto
Right on.
To: ASA Vet; Jarhead_22; Enemy Of The State; 45Auto; Joe Brower
Are you prepared to kill me or die to take my guns? Yes they are prepared to order you killed to take your guns. Ruby Ridge and Waco come to mind.
Note that the people at Waco and Ruby Ridge did not number in the hundreds of thousands or millions, and did not come after those who gave orders to the JBTs (and their families). It might be different next time.
To: Ancesthntr
It's worthy of note that in both these cases, the attack was heavily pressed by the feds against people who were quite reluctant to finally grit their teeth and return fire. I've read the BATF and FBI reports on both incidents, and it's quite apparent that if a determined counterattack had been mounted, while the eventual outcome may not have changed, the body count among the feds would have been considerably worse.
You will recall the siege of the "Montana Freemen" that occurred subsequently in 1995. It's thought that the feds would have acted in a similar fashion had not the events at Waco and RR unfolded they way they did, in addition to public awareness and reactions regarding same.
Stay safe,
To: Enemy Of The State
I'm not in the habit of handing over my guns to any criminal, regardless of title or elected office.If it's time to bury 'em, it's past time to dig 'em up.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson