"1.8 Million Definite Militia Members" to March on DC, >>MOD WARNING<<<

That sounds like meaningless rhetoric (it would be completely unaccomplishable) and once again, he said not a single word about gun confiscation.

 

Then they, and the left handed media are not doing their duty to the American people.

If youre completely clueless, and not interested in helping America and the American people, just stay home on election night.

If you dont like having to show id to buy beer, just stay home on election night.

If you think handing out free crack pipes is a good idea, just stay home on election night.

If you wanna destroy the second amendment and confiscate everyones legal guns, just stay home on election night.

If you have a deep internal lust to slay the unborn, just stay home on election night.

thanks.

 

I don't recall Hitler specifically mentioning gas chambers either.

 

In the video.

 

Have you ever read the second amendment ?

Please quote the text here in your next response.

 

Please stop the nasty remarks, post on topic and do so respectfully, or you will have to leave the thread.
Consider yourselves warned

Shangrila
Site Moderator

 

Godwin's Law nice.

Thanks for signaling that you can be freely ignored for the remainder of the thread.

- - - Updated - - -

There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment banning a civilian security force and nothing in Obama's speech about gun confiscation.

And no, I don't take orders from you. You want the text, you post it. I know what it says.

 

Since, I already know youre not going to bother to provide it, Ill do it for ya.

The Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Here is video of obama, attempting to pervert the second amendment, by creating "a well regulated militia", under government control. The government can set all the rules and regulations for said militia, and if you dont qualify, to the new rules, the government will remove your access to the second amendment.

[video=youtube;Tt2yGzHfy7s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s[/video]

Thats what obamas lies were all about.,

 

Do you take orders from the DNC, or just Obama?

 

Cosidering I've never voted for Obama and the last time I voted for a democrat above the local level was in 2004, the answer is neither.

Nice deflection though. How's it coming on that quote from Obama where he calls for gun confiscation?

 

Supreme Court

The defendants petitioned the United States Supreme Court to hear the case. The plaintiffs did not oppose but, in fact, welcomed the petition. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on November 20, 2007.[21] The court rephrased the question to be decided as follows:

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question: Whether the following provisions, D.C. Code §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22–4504(a), and 7-2507.02, violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?

This represented the first time since the 1939 case United States v. Miller that the Supreme Court had directly addressed the scope of the Second Amendment.[17]

 

Where does he say anything about the civilian security force being the only route for gun ownership and that if you don't qualify you can't carry guns?

 

You do know Bush was president in 2007, right?

And what does striking down DC's handgun laws have to do with a civilian security force? And where is this supposed quote from Obama about gun confiscation?

No conjecture, provide a quote from him directly or from his civilian security force plan that would confiscate guns.

 

..sounds like a good idea, to me. That is the last resort of americans, if & when their govt no longer serves the people & secures our rights, but exploits us & steals our labors. That is what 'the right of the people to alter or abolish it' is about.

I've had many threads on this topic over the years, so it is nothing new.. this is just some pretense from shocked leftists who had no qualms about threatening violence against bush or reagan.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=281698

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=332377

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=332631

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=281432

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=284072

But if you are a passive type, or prefer the calm waters of bondage to the tempestuous seas of liberty, just stay at home & do nothing. Some of us will fight for your freedom, even if you are too timid to do it yourself.

Thanks for the link.. i'll check into it & maybe join that rally.

 

A militia March on Washington sounds like a trap--they are being lured into a box canyon thinking they are saving a damsel in distress where they will be mowed down by the savages all spaghetti western style.

 

Its a fact nevertheless.

Bad people do not always announce their bad intentions in advance.

So demanding a quote by Obama that says he's going ignore the 2nd amendment or else is pretty naive.

 

Not nearly as naive is basing your condemnation 100% on baseless conjecture.

 

More accurately, if 50,000 people show up, about 100-500 would be federal agents working to lead people into committing actions that could get them arrested that they otherwise would not have without the organization and suggestion of said agents. That's how the government works now.

 

You seem to think the Constitution allows one to break the law. Protest away and you are fine, break the law, go to jail.

 

Hmm... you know, all it's really saying is that everyone should be armed (at their own expense) so the government can call them up (well regulated) from reserves (militia)... in other words, like Switzerland.

Civil Righters had the theme "We Shall Overcome" as their anthem. What would be the anthem of a mob of TP demonstraters? Something like this? http://stuff.digitalock.com/farightanthem.mp3

 

Actually, it's saying that an armed populace is necessary for the security of a free State.

 

Then it's the "free State" part that's messing everyone up. Given the context of what the writers were living in, they probably meant the state's freedom from British control, but now lots of people take it to mean individual freedom from their own state... in other words, an ironic constitutional right to use weapons to be anarchists.

There's something odd about American-style democracy. Theoretically, the whole point is people are supposed to elect a government so they can trust it, but so many feel like they can't trust their own selections. Why? Do people not trust their own judgement?

Ever notice how far-righties and far-lefties are totally on the same page when it comes their distrust of their own government? That's funny... how come they've never noticed that? Why do they keep at each-other's throats?

Far-lefties think it's the result of government control through lobbiests and media-ownership by big-business shareholders. What do far-righties think is controlling the government they can't trust?

 

I'm confident that the rally will be more orderly than the ANSWERnik and OccuTard cluster(*)(*)(*)(*)s that invariably led to violence and vandalism.

 

For well over a century in the US, really since the late 1800's and the deliberate dilution of the population of independent family farmers and craftsmen with in influx of unskilled cheap labor and the industrial revolution, the government of the States and the Federal Government have been bought and paid for by a financial over-class. THAT is why the American people don't trust their government, because it really has ceased to act as THEIR government for quite some time.

 

Hmm... well... then it means an abstract form of non-elected government-without-representation has evolved. In the late 1700's it was in-your-face British control, and the only way to get rid of it was with armed revolt.

But now it's an etherial oppression floating around in the currency-exchanges... how do you fight that? Can it be fixed through constitutional ammendments, or would it require a revolution. How do you revolt against something so vapourous that it can increase its own strength selling arms to both sides while propagating each side into thinking its the other side that is the oppressor's foundation?