In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
You wonder why were losing our gun rights!!!
jnmiller75
Member Posts: 899 ✭✭✭✭
You should read some of the posts on this topic about a gun collector who was arrested in Chicago.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=213780
Everything from beliving the Liberal press that he had machineguns, or that he is a NAZI, or he has more money that I do, or lives with his mom so screw him.
The more I think about this the more it upsets me. Here are, I assume, gun owners and sportsmen who automatically assume this guy is guilty because the media said so. But the paper said he had machineguns and is a nazi, so it must be true.[xx(] Which I am willing to bet will later be proven to be legal semi-auto versions.
Like I said in my reply to that post. Whenever the media incorrectlly calls a semi-auto a machinegun, or 2 guns and a brick of 22 shells a arsenal, or half a can of powder for reloading bomb making supplies it gives more ammo to anti-gun groups who cite these articles as the gosspel, and makes people on the fence about gun control or don't care one way or the other shift to the anti-gun side because they hear and read these same stories and assume they are true.
I don't know how to correct this. After all I suppose it makes for a more exciting story to say an arsenal was found instead of saying they found a old Stevens crackshot 22 and a 20 ga pump shotgun. But I do know that it has become so common that even other gun owners hear these stories and automatically assume they are true.[V][V]
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=213780
Everything from beliving the Liberal press that he had machineguns, or that he is a NAZI, or he has more money that I do, or lives with his mom so screw him.
The more I think about this the more it upsets me. Here are, I assume, gun owners and sportsmen who automatically assume this guy is guilty because the media said so. But the paper said he had machineguns and is a nazi, so it must be true.[xx(] Which I am willing to bet will later be proven to be legal semi-auto versions.
Like I said in my reply to that post. Whenever the media incorrectlly calls a semi-auto a machinegun, or 2 guns and a brick of 22 shells a arsenal, or half a can of powder for reloading bomb making supplies it gives more ammo to anti-gun groups who cite these articles as the gosspel, and makes people on the fence about gun control or don't care one way or the other shift to the anti-gun side because they hear and read these same stories and assume they are true.
I don't know how to correct this. After all I suppose it makes for a more exciting story to say an arsenal was found instead of saying they found a old Stevens crackshot 22 and a 20 ga pump shotgun. But I do know that it has become so common that even other gun owners hear these stories and automatically assume they are true.[V][V]
Comments
You make a common mistake. You assume that just because a man owns guns...He SUPPORTS THE CONSTITUTION !(I speak here about the negative posters over on GB)
That he isn't so ignorant of what the Second Amendment means that he actually supports gun laws.(Same thing..gun owners that support gun laws)
I call it stupid, myself...plenty of evidence as to what the Founders intended...the ability to take out a tyrannical goverment at any time.
No...the bulk of 'gun owners' over to General support gun laws...as does the NRA and 90 % of 'gun owners'.
I find such people a far deadly threat to freedom then all the Shumers/Kennedy's/Fiendsteins/Brady's in the entire world..because they appear to be staunch 'freedom fighters'...in reality they are Benedict Arnolds to the Second.
(Gunphreak raises good points...but without the ability to point to the truth...we are finished)
edited to respond to Gunphreaks excellent observations.
I am not making the connection here with the relevance that only people who believe in the 2nd Amendment or the Constitution are afforded any rights. A lot of gun owners are wholly ignorant of the significance of either document, but really don't care as long as they can still hunt.
Be careful with your wording of the issues you stand for, because I know this isn't your train of thought.
Don't know if I follow your reasoning for sure.
But let me hasten to assure you...I believe that the NRA and MOST gunowners are riding on the backs of a VERY few men out here...men that will go to the wall to defend the Second.
The Elites KNOW this...helped along by position reports from so-called 'pro-gunners'...and only push whatever laws that can pass today.
Unfortunately..the unknowing and the uncaring must be dragged along with the decent people out there.
That being said...I am at the point that were it possible to be branded with a big "A" in the middle of my forhead...that signifing that I am armed and uphold the Constitution...and to be left completely apart from their freedom destroying rules, regulations and other Anti-Constitution bullsh**...I would watch as they marched the sheep off to the camps.
I am tired of the 'good fight'. I tire of the names 'good citizens' call me.
I know I dissect a lot of what I read piece by piece to come up with my reasons for why I believe as I do, and I suppose I'll show you where my trouble comes from on the previous post...
quote:You make a common mistake. You assume that just because a man owns guns...He SUPPORTS THE CONSTITUTION !
I find this to be not necessarily the truth. Did this guy actually do something wrong (not necessarily illegal). Did he harm anyone or destroy someone else's property, or did he just have the audacity to own something that the gov't says is a no-no???
I don't honestly believe a man has to support the Constitution to be afforded the rights and assume the responsibilities of those same rights.
quote:That he isn't so ignorant of what the Second Amendment means that he actually supports gun laws. I call it stupid, myself...plenty of evidence as to what the Founders intended...the ability to take out a tyrannical goverment at any time.
Let's think outside the box for a moment, Highball. The Founders intended us to be armed for a multitude of reasons (not coincidentally, hunting was covered elsewhere in the BoR's). It was not formulated specifically to destroy tyrannical gov't. It was to ensure a Free State. Remember that particular clause in the 2nd Amendment??? It was to ensure that we would not have to rely on a standing army to defend us, and was a right specifically meant to be used against all enemies; foreign and domestic, from the highwayman or thug all the way up to an invading enemy army (even our own, if necessary).
quote:No...the bulk of 'gun owners' over to General support gun laws...as does the NRA and 90 % of 'gun owners'.
Even the colonists obeyed certain edicts they knew were wrong, until the redcoats crossed the line. Admittedly, we have a non-distinct line in the sand, sure, but when the feds come to our doors wanting our firearms, we should tell them where to go.
I know where you are coming from on your position, having read hundreds of your posts before, and I can assure you, there are more people who do not feel this is correct than what you might believe. Some just don't post, that's all.
quote:I find such people a far deadly threat to freedom then all the Shumers/Kennedy's/Fiendsteins/Brady's in the entire world..because they appear to be staunch 'freedom fighters'...in reality they are Benedict Arnolds to the Second.
Be careful, here. The others you speak of have never been able to buy firearms mail-order, or not have had to deal with the freedom of not bothering with the F4473 or the JBT's. We were born into a world where there was no other way, unless you inherited firearms from a family member who was able to own without jumping through all the hoops.
The goals of the anti's is to atrophy the right, by making new supplies of firearms unattainable, and we already know how this is working in the machine gun department. We had another taste of what it was to have restrictions on rifles, high-capacity mags and propaganda to demonize us for owning such "dangerous firearms". A generation later, those people would be the ones who would be enslaved, and unless we do something right now, it will be our fault.
The truly unfortunate thing is...all we can do at this moment is to try and educate people as to the deadly danger we are in as a free country.
This so-called 'war on terror' has deeper roots then meets the eye.
Advanced Member
6787 Posts
Posted - 09/10/2006 : 08:23:44 AM
Friend jnmiller75;
You make a common mistake. You assume that just because a man owns guns...He SUPPORTS THE CONSTITUTION !(I speak here about the negative posters over on GB)
That he isn't so ignorant of what the Second Amendment means that he actually supports gun laws.(Same thing..gun owners that support gun laws)
I call it stupid, myself...plenty of evidence as to what the Founders intended...the ability to take out a tyrannical goverment at any time.
No...the bulk of 'gun owners' over to General support gun laws...as does the NRA and 90 % of 'gun owners'.
Highball, I agree with you 100%, and never assumed that because a person owned a gun they automatically supported the constitution. I know personally hunters/shooters that agreed with Klintons assault weapon ban, think nobody should own machineguns, think nobody should own evil black rifles, think the NRA is the gun owners savior and can do no wrong, and on and on and on.
The point I was trying to make is that when the liberal press is allowed to continually exaggerate stories when they discuss anything dealing with firearms, it gives more ammo to the anti's, shifts fence sitters to the anti's, and all the gun owners that don't care about anyone or anything as long as it doesn't affect them, toward the anti's agenda. After all if you keep repeating something long enough it becomes the truth and no one questions it any longer.
quote:The goals of the anti's is to atrophy the right, by making new supplies of firearms unattainable, and we already know how this is working in the machine gun department. We had another taste of what it was to have restrictions on rifles, high-capacity mags and propaganda to demonize us for owning such "dangerous firearms". A generation later, those people would be the ones who would be enslaved, and unless we do something right now, it will be our fault.
Unfortunately what most people don't realize is the the anti's are smart. They know they can never get an all out gun ban, so they chip away at it piece by piece. gunphreak gave a couple prime examples. But most gun owners don't own a machinegun, so they don't care if no new ones can be purchased. Most don't think anybody needs an AK-47, or high-cap mags, or bayonets, or armor piecing ammo, etc, so they don't care when there is attempts to ban them.
Unfortunately, by the time the majority finally wake up and realize they don't have anything left it will be too late.
quote:Highball Posted - 09/10/2006 : 8:17:53 PM
quote:
and unless we do something right now, it will be our fault.
The truly unfortunate thing is...all we can do at this moment is to try and educate people as to the deadly danger we are in as a free country.
The unfortunate thing is that for many gun owners, they can't or won't allow themselves to be educated. They have been brain washed by the anti's, get hostile if you even suggest the NRA has faults, belive the world would be a safer place if you were only allowed to own a 20 guage shotgun for ducks and a .270 for deer, etc. There are times I would rather try and have a discussion with a group of rabid anti-gunners, than try and point out common sense errors with the way they most gun owners think.
quote:There are times I would rather try and have a discussion with a group of rabid anti-gunners, than try and point out common sense errors with the way they most gun owners think.
I find Anti-gunners far less a threat to our security and freedom then the so-called "Pro-gunner" 'I support gun laws' type.
Every time a gun owner supports a gun law...they weaken our...AND the Constitutional Rights we all should hold dear.
An Anti-gunner is HONESTLY Anti-Constitutional..while the ignorant/uninformed/weak-willed 'gunner' supporting gun laws only pretends to support the Constitution.
I do not believe that we can win the war of words. The govermment, media, NRA, and most gun owners are against interpreting the Constitution as written...purporting to find meriad Federal, State, and Local Laws contained therein.
The propaganda machine has been so active so long the American male has traded in his manhood for government security.
Couldn't of said it any better.
They have been brain washed by the anti's, get hostile if you even suggest the NRA has faults
Boy, ain't THAT the truth. [;)][:D][:D][:D]
Part of the answer is clear; it's nearly illegal now to talk about militant opposition to government policy. At the very least, those who organize around such ideas publicly, subject themselves to harassment from everyone from the IRS to the ATF to local and federal Attorneys General and more. The list is endless and can certainly be quite intimidating. To me, the loss of my precious United States of America while I stood by doing nothing but gripein' and moanin' would be an infinitely worse fate than anything any government entity could dish out though.
There are sites and forums and email groups that do nothing but address the issues which reside just under the surface in discussions like this thread, but they are understandably leary of new-comers, and thus don't grow and don't spread the word with the effeciency that the internet is so well-suited for.
I am not hostile in the least when I hear crticism of the NRA, but I think it's unwise to write them off completely. If we truly believe in the righteousness of the Constitution, then the ideal solution is to win without firing a round, which means building voting blocks. I have no hesitation whatsoever in taking up my arms against a government gone run-amock, but if I can be a part of a political movement that precludes that eventuality, that will be my choice. Since it's unrealistic to expect any political movement to be perfect, then I'm willing to align myself with groups that already have very effective organizational structures in place, and the NRA happens to be one such organization. I will continue to support them for the good they can do, and work from the inside (with my vote) to minimize the policies they institute that I can't support in good conscience.
Anyway, my bottom line question is, is anyone here interested in actually DOING something about the loss and weakening of our rights? If so, what? Where? In public? If not public, how do we recruit? If in public, do we stifle ourselves to keep out of trouble? I would say, "No!" Otherwise, we should stay right here and just gripe and moan.
Blues
That is just exactly what the Elite have used as a 'pop-off' valve for many years..side-lining any real attempt at bringing back the Constitution. People throw their lives into 'changing things'..and if they get close they are bought off..or get cancer and die.
Organize in public for conflict and you will see conflict...when the Jack-Booted Thugs come and collect you.
Forget the masses..they are brain-washed into subservience. Look to the few..they are the last hope for America.