Assembling the Counter-revolutionary Forces

Federal Armies Being Amassed

Recently the Posse Comitatus laws were 'amended' by Congress to allow use of the US Military against the citizens of the United States, within the United States.  Additionally, many federal agencies are arming themselves.  The Department of Homeland Security alone has ordered two billion rounds of small arms ammo, enough for 30 years of a Vietnam-level conflict, and 2,700 mine-resistant armored personnel carriers. 

Should not the informed and engaged citizen do likewise?  Should we not acquire personal firearms and ammo stocks and otherwise prepare to join a new American revolution, should it come?  Wouldn't that be prudent?  Wouldn't that be in the American tradition?

Guns are bad, though.  Right?  Don't you hear that daily from democrats?  From liberals?  From 'progressives?'

It should come as no surprise that most democrats are anti-gun.  Democrats are big government acolytes, and big government requires citizen cooperation or submission, or - gasp - compulsion.  Compelling an armed citizenry is more difficult than compelling a disarmed citizenry.  Duh.

The framers of our Constitution, fresh from shooting tyrants in order to win our freedoms, understood that guns are for shooting tyrants.  That's why they wrote the Second Amendment as they did - to guarantee that future generations of Americans would be able to shoot tyrants again if needed.  The Second Amendment is not about making sure we can shoot Bambi or burglars.  The Second Amendment is what assures that all the other amendments stay in place.

Most democrats want to subjugate the population of this country to government rule.  That's why they are waging wars against anonymity, against personal mobility, against economical food, against energy independence, against the accumulation of wealth, against privacy, and above all against the expression of truth and thoughts.  But to subjugate a large population of armed citizens - well, how to go about it?

They implement the Czechoslovakian model. 

			Prague Spring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Prague Spring (Czech: Pražské jaro, Slovak: Pražská jar) was a period of political liberalization in Czechoslovakia during the era of its...
			View on en.wikipedia.org	Preview by Yahoo

To summarize the Czechoslovakian mode., you find out where the guns are.  You do that through registration and such seemingly innocuous means as 'background checks' before allowing a purchase, or having your doctor ask your children during a sports physical if there are guns in your house, or having teachers ask the same sorts of questions, etc.  All that info goes into databases.  And our government is nothing if not able to access any databases they like.  That's why they require those questions be asked.

Next, you generate as much anti-gun sentiment as possible.  That's hard to do, except in areas where people don't hunt or sport shoot.  Big cities and their immediate suburbs, in other words.  But those areas are home to close to half of Americans.  The other half have their share of anti-gun thinkers too, although far fewer.  So to generate even more anti-gun sentiment, the democrats fan the flames of fear by leveraging every gun-related event.  They view Columbine and other such tragedies as golden opportunities, getting legislation passed that would have done nothing to prevent such tragedies but 'felt good' and satisfied the idiot citizen's wish that 'somebody do something.'  You can depend on some democrat - always a democrat, by the way - to be the first to propose new legislation following any gun-related tragedy.

Finally, you confiscate.  At first you do this by confiscating weapons from people who commit felonies.  Then you confiscate weapons from people who commit misdemeanors.  Then you confiscate from people whose medical records contain any hint of mental abnormality.  Then you confiscate from people who write blogs like this one.  You boil the confiscation frog slowly and incrementally, lest you alarm the armed populace.  You do it 'for the good of Americans.'  You take generations to do it, and you grease the skids through media and public indoctrination centers, commonly known as 'schools.'  Who needs guns, after all?  We have police to protect us.  So give us your guns and we'll protect you.  We'll protect Bambi and Peter Cottontail too.  You don't want Bambi and Peter Cottontail shot do you?  And your neighbors will feel safer too.

Who will protect us?  Turns out we also have Homeland Security agents with two billion rounds of small arms ammo and 2,700 mine-resistant armored vehicles to protect us from terrorists.  They must know something about terrorists that we don't, to be armed to the teeth like that.  The ammo alone is enough to supply a Vietnam-level war for 30 years.  And we have the USDA armed agents to protect us.  The Post office.  Seldom does a week pass that we don't read of another federal agency arming itself.  Why?  Against who?

Now even the military can be used against American citizens.  However, the military is made up of patriots, and a president attempting to invoke their might against the citizenry may well instead provoke the military into taking action against the government itself as they uphold their oath to protect the Constitution against 'enemies, foreign and domestic.'  In this case the federal government would be the domestic enemy.  So what forces could the federal government use against its citizens?  Homeland Security, The USDA, Post Office, and any number of other federal departments, whose allegiance to their government paycheck is strong and their appreciation for traditional American freedoms weak. 

Obama and the democrats are building an army of federal agents that can be used against its citizens.  They fear that at some point we will start shooting the agents of tyranny, as our founding fathers meant for us to do when necessary.  They want an army they can depend on.

So of course a disarmed citizenry would be helpful.  

Your Ostrich Killer's advice: don't disarm, and don't cooperate with the forces and agencies who would help enable disarming our citizenry.

A second cup of coffee is calling me . . .

IF WE CAN SAVE EVEN ONE CHILD'S LIFE

Then We Should Do It

That's what Obama said when he gave is speech kicking off his assault on the Second Amendment.

Do you agree with him?

If so, then the below information might be helpful in focusing your attention on the Obamacure (the cure Obama would push, using his gun control logic.)

Annual Child Deaths in US by Cause (recent data rounded off to nearest 100, as reported):

Gun-related:  1500.  Two thirds are drug or suicide related.  ObamaCure: No guns.  Partial cure: no drugs.
Car crashes:  1500.  ObamaCure:  Make it illegal for kids to ride in motor vehicles.
Drownings:      900.  ObamaCure:  Make it illegal for children to be allowed near water of any sort.
Animal Attack:  30.  ObamaCure:   Round up all animals.
Horse Riding:    23.  Data from Alberta, BC.  Scale up for yourself.  ObamaCure: Confiscate horses.

GUNS AND THE AMERICAN EXPERIMENT

Why Americans Are Armed and Dangerous

No, it isn't to allow us to hunt Bambi.  No, it isn't to allow us to shoot burglars.  We are armed so that should our government become a tyranny, we the citizens will have the means to revolt.

Remember the times in which the Constitution was written: we had just come out of a bloody revolutionary war against a tyrannical government - and we won because the average citizen was as well armed as the troops of the tyrannical government.  It was the clear intent of our founding fathers that the citizenry have the means and be able to undertake such a revolt again, should it be required.  That is why they wrote :". . . the right to keep and bear arms SHALL  NOT BE INFRINGED."

Think about what that means to you, the citizen.  And think about the threat such a concept means to those holding federal power - the executive branch, the legislative branch, the judicial branch.

You, dear reader, are a threat to them.  They, however, have the power to make you less of a threat.  They can pass laws that make you a criminal.  For example, let's suppose they pass a law that requires you, the citizen, to register your firearms.  I can predict that there will be a 100,000,000 increase in the criminal population of this country overnight - because very few citizens will comply.

Which raises the next question: what can the Federal Government do to identify gun owners?
1. Track ammo sales, or restrict them to gun owners who can show proof of registration.
2. Search your home on 'probable cause' (maybe a neighbor reported they saw you with a gun.)
3. Restrict hunting licenses and access to shooting ranges to those with proof of gun registration.

Our government is quite innovative when it comes to legislating means to control the population.

Why not register, you ask?  Because a registered firearm is one that can be confiscated.  This is the sole purpose of such a registry.  Do a check of the history of the 20th century and see if that is so.  Start w/ Czechoslovakia  before the Soviets invaded.

But, you point out, passing such laws would be an infringement . . . You're right.  But many such laws already exist.  And the Constitution is being trammeled daily, its laws ignored.  Where, for example, does the Constitution give the Federal Government the authority to collect money from Jack, who has money, and give it to Joe, who doesn't?  Isn't that robbery?  Two thirds of your taxes are used for that purpose.  I've talked about entitlement programs elsewhere in my blogs, so we'll drop that discussion for now.  Just understand that the Constitution is no barrier to bad legislation.  Even members of the supreme court cite 'international law' when ruling one way or another - yet they're supposed to be bound by the Constitution.

You have a responsibility to 'protect and defend' the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, just like any member of the military.  You can do so by arming your household and teaching your children responsible firearm safety and how to shoot straight.

Think about our society today, compared to 50 years ago: today our every move is monitored (cell phones, tablets, traffic cams, mall cams, store cams, cars with OnStar or GPS, drones, etc.) and our every conversation is monitored (cell phones, tablets, emails, blog postings like this one, etc.)  Our shopping habits are entered into databases - think about that little 'membership' card you use at your local food store.  So are our library book check outs. Any interaction with commerce involving a sale ring-up and a debit or charge card.  Our privacy is gone.  What is this data used for?  Profiling.  Think about how your web browser, your cell phone, your tablet device knows what ads to show you.  Now scale up that simple paradigm to the federal level and imagine how those in power who want to stay in power might use that capability. Imagine the laws they might try to pass.  Think about the laws already in place.

So don't go thinking that we'll never have another revolution, because at some point it's either revolt or become slaves either of our own government or some invading country's forces.  Today we have a chief executive in the White House whose personal thinking is that the private sector economy exists to fund the public (government) sector.  Doesn't that make the private sector slaves of the public sector?

You and I may not see the next revolution.  But it's inevitable.

One last thought: the price of living in a free and open society is that we are a target-rich environment for wackos.  Freedom isn't free, and it isn't necessarily 100% safe.  But, as Ben Franklin is often quoted as saying: "people willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

Register your firearms if you're willing to be a slave in exchange for knowing only the police and the criminals will have firearms.  If you're not willing to register, let your representatives know.  Show this blog to others who think like you.