Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

What you’ll see in the rebellion: A nation of Sarajevos

Written By: Bob - Jan• 05•13

When I wrote What you’ll seen in the rebellion, I had no idea how widely read an article warning of the dangers of second Revolutionary War could become. It has been “shared” thousands of times in social media, and new readers and comments are pouring in constantly.

Since the time it was written, state legislators in Illinois and New York have formally pressed for crushing gun control measures that would outlaw standard-capacity magazines, all semi-automatic handguns, rifles, and pistols, and even pump shotguns. There would be no grandfathering in these proposals, and no inheritance rights. A complete confiscation of these arms, “liberty’s teeth” as other have termed them, are the goal of these totalitarian governments. Legislators in other states are plotting similar measures.

In Washington, DC, federal Democrats—goaded by figures in the poli-media calling for the murders of gun owners and politicians that would oppose their “common sense” statism—have pushed for a similar raft of legislation, supporting the criminalization and confiscation of the most common firearms in the United States and various accessories. The Vice President of the United States has signaled to the mayor of Boston (how historically apt) that the White House itself may attempt to circumvent Congress and attempt to outlaw these common firearms with an executive order.

The people have responded to these threats by not merely buying up the firearms, magazines, and ammunition that might be affected by these proposed bans as they did in 1993/94 before the Clinton-era ban was pushed through, but by purchasing nearly every firearm of military utility of the past 100+ years. Ruger 10/22s and other common .22LR rifles have doubled in price when they can be found at all. Inexpensive Mosin-Nagants, originally designed in 1891 and typically found by the dozen in your average neighborhood gun shops, are nowhere to be found, and their ammunition is gone as well. U.S. citizens are preparing for war against their government by the millions. Americans aren’t “going Galt” in response to the push by would-be elites to surging statism. We’re on the cusp of going Häyhä.

I’ve done a lot more research (and considerable praying that I’ll turn out to be wrong) in recent days, based upon both history and evolving current realities.

The situation isn’t as bad as we’ve feared it might be. It’s far, far worse.

If the statists push through with their plan, we’re possibly looking into a nation of a thousand Sarajevos and Groznys where a war will rip this nation to shreds and cause a horror from which we may never recover.

If you aren’t familiar with these analogies, allow me a moment to explain.

Once one of the most tolerant and ethnically-integrated cities in the world before the break-up of Yugoslavia, Sarajevo suffered the longest siege in modern military history, lasting 3 years, 10 months, 3 weeks and 3 days. The long and short of it is that the Serbs attacked Sarajevo with modern military weapons that included artillery, anti-aircraft guns, tanks, mortars, rockets, and the other nasty toys of a modern military in the possession of their 18,000 man army. Opposing them were roughly 70,000 poorly-armed Bosnian soldiers and militiamen armed with a hodgepodge of small arms including World War-era rifles, AK-47s, and hunting and formal target rifles.

The Siege of Sarajevo was a conflict of a heavily-armed but numerically inferior Serbian force against a lightly-armed but numerically superior Bosnian force. It became a sniper’s war, where innocent civilians bore the brunt of the brutality, terrorism, starvation, and death.

As noted in John West’s Fry The Brain: The Art of Urban Sniping and its Role in Modern Guerrilla Warfare, while the Serbians inflicted a significant number of casualties with a constant shelling of the city, a concerted effort was made by both sides to use relatively untrained snipers to shape the urban battlefield. Uniformed Serbian snipers didn’t just shoot Bosnian defenders of the city, but made a concerted effort to murder every man, woman and child in the city that crossed their path in an effort to terrorize Sarajevans into surrender. The Bosnians sniped back in a war that had former neighbors and friends killing one another.

Grozny was subjected to three much shorter, arguably more brutal battles, in 1994-95, in 1996, and again in 1999-2000, that saw brutal fighting and war crimes committed by both sides.

There is nothing so deadly and desperate as cornered tyrants, as the battered people of Syria would tell you right now if they weren’t trapped between Bashir Assad’s government forces and the al Qaeda-aligned militants supplied by Barack Obama’s Administration and the late ambassador Chris Stevens.

If you think that couldn’t or wouldn’t happen here, I direct you to the complaints department led by the ghost of Vickie Weaver and the children that burned to death in the Branch Davidian compound in Waco under the last Democrat President, who was far less radical and divisive that the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

A government that can find no fault in the deaths of  Jose Guerena or hundreds of Mexicans and several federal agents in Operation Fast and Furious has proven it has no regard for human life in the pursuit of radical political philosophies. They will kill you if they think they can get away with it, and they will not blink.

A nation with just 800,000 law enforcement officers and 3 million active and reserve military personal cannot easily defeat and enslave a free people armed with 300 million firearms, even if large numbers of the police and military didn’t walk away or switch sides to follow their oath to the Constitution instead of any given leader, as many assuredly will.

Retribution against those who would be responsible for such a conflict by attempting to undermine the Constitution is assured. They will face extra-judicial justice walking across the street with their families, or in a formal war crimes trial. Either way, their attempt at tyranny ends in death or prison… hardly what these would-be elites imagined for themselves as they planned to loot the remains of a once-powerful economic engine.

I have two words of advice for those that imagine they can subjugate the arsenal of freedom with the stoke of an autopen.

Tread carefully.

[Update: For our purposes, I don't particularly care about who was "good" or "bad" in Sarajevo. All related comments seeking to justify one side or the other have been deleted, and no more will be approved. It's not germane to the core of our discussion beyond use as an example.]

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

64 Comments

  1. Poshboy says:

    It should be a very different nation post-Rebellion; thanks for being one of the few on the Web to address this phase of our growing unnecessary unpleasantness. I think you are right about the retributions and war crimes trials. And we will be lucky if the after effects remain contained within those defined parameters.

    In the 1780s, we were blessed by Providence to have Gen. Washington carefully guiding the officer corps and others as we removed the British Loyalists from the colonies, shipping them alive but destitute to England, Canada, and the West Indies. I greatly fear, after the undisciplined nightmares of the 20th century and mass political migrations, we will not be so contained or controlled this time around. It may get very ugly.

    The political Left has no idea what they are doing by shaking this angry hornet’s nest called 2013 America. None whatsoever. Their cognitive dissonance right now is astounding.

    • Col Bat Guano says:

      I said this over at Townhall, and wil repeat it here. If The DC wants to go nuclear on the Second Amendment, they better be prepared to finish what they start. I have never seen or heard so many people ready to fight their own government. 0bama is a big enough narcissist to think no one will stand against him. He easily cut Boehner’s manhood off, so probably figures all his opposition will be equally limp. Got a clue for you 0bama, Boehner isn’t my representative even if he served my district. And neither are you.

  2. Goatroper says:

    I find myself wondering if those who would disarm America have given any real thought to how much their own lives will change if they really push this to its extreme. And that extreme seems to be what those in power want.

    I don’t think they’re going to find the going easy in flyover country. They may hold sway in larger urban areas, at least for a while, but there’s a lot of country to try to manage. They don’t have the manpower.

    And who do they think will supply their urban sanctuaries? Who will feed them? How many of them know how to grow and fix and mend and make? This sword cuts both ways.

    Goatroper

    • Coldsteel1983 says:

      GR,

      No they haven’t given this any real thought, or they are so consumed with their own vapors that they’ve discounted the will of the people.

      It’s been my contention in a number of places, that “they” have no idea of what they’re about to do. Something will be started that will not be able to be stopped, an uncontrollable chain of events.

      And, the frightening part is I’m not even alluding to the eventual violence that this will devolve into. When their actions cause tens of millions of their most valuable citizens to cease to recognize and support “their” government, you’ve opened up the road that’ll terminate with the end of this edition of the United States.

      Jeff B.

      • PJ says:

        “When their actions cause tens of millions of their most valuable citizens to cease to recognize and support “their” government, you’ve opened up the road that’ll terminate with the end of this edition of the United States.”

        Which is a good thing. The people, the land, the way of life is not the same thing as the tyrannical government in power over them. They will continue when it is gone. We don’t need an empire, nor do we need a single homogenized version of America. 50 independent states will do just fine.

  3. Orion says:

    I think you’re mistaken.

    The cities will be graveyards, yes – their power, water, and food sources cut off and armed gangs running rampant through them scavenging for what’s left.

    But I think with the large number of military experienced folks sworn to defend the Constitution, what will happen is the few thousand ‘elected’ officials in this country are going to get dropped rapidly, as are the Party power-brokers who select them.

    Why waste time and effort fighting people who aren’t your enemy – cops, Soldiers, etc – when what you want is to get rid of the problem. Clear out the cities, clear out the criminals in office, and hey-howdy, you’re done.

    After that, we might see things get back to normal fairly rapidly.

    Either way, it’s going to be one unholy, bloody, nasty, mess.

    Orion

    • Bill Harzia says:

      “Why waste time and effort fighting people who aren’t your enemy – cops, Soldiers, etc – when what you want is to get rid of the problem. Clear out the cities, clear out the criminals in office, and hey-howdy, you’re done.”

      You, sir, have hit the nail on the head. The patriot porn sites have us fighting the army, fighting our neighbors, fighting each other. If you’re humping a 100 pound pack through the woods, trying to avoid the army and its drones, you’re doing it wrong.

      • sofa says:

        Those who push this will send those cops and soldiers out to instigate this, specifically so the effort is directed there rather than at the leadership (where it rightly belongs- see also “Clinton Rules”). Cops and homeland security army and soldiers have pensions, just like the train conductors at Auschwitz, and the great majority will follow orders (talk to the junior officer corps, and be shocked at their conditioning for this scenario).

        They have created an army in our midst, and 1.6 billion rounds in just a few years- specifically to use. And the surveillance/intel will initially be overwhelming. And don’t forget the 53% complicit enablers turned informers. The ground is prepared.

        Kansas.
        An example that everyone needs to study and contemplate. It is the american precedent for where this government is going. It’s the dream of his father, and he’s just the puppet to serve it up.

        Kansas.
        Harden your heart.
        The only thing worse than winning such a scenario, is losing.

        No sane person would want this. But it’s what is being pushed down your throat at an accelerating pace.

  4. 55six says:

    Reposted with link, great writing. -55six

  5. NASA_1967 says:

    This is an excellent follow on to “What you’ll see in the rebellion”. What was unthinkable a few short years ago is now practically upon us. With the quickening of the pace of those who want to disarm all Americans, I believe we’ll see a rebellion sooner than later.

  6. Poshboy says:

    Goatroper and Orion, I think you are right. Flyover country and rural areas will remain relatively in good shape, thanks to local and state governments who will enforce a basic peace. It will be the urban areas that will suffer the most, as you indicated due to logistics disruption.

    State government officials–at least those loyal to the Constitution–will be the ones who keep the worst of it limited to certain areas. I think once it is over, the next leaders of our nation will come from that cadre, if not from military leaders stepping forward to do the right thing. The Constitution will continue and thrive, but absent the Left’s presence. That monumental political change in itself deserves a reflective post.

    On a personal level, much of the political counterattack will be directed towards Washington, D.C., as those responsible for this entire idiotic mess live and work there. I’m a resident of the close-in VA suburbs, and having lived through the ’02 sniper attacks, the work of just two amateurs, I am deathly afraid of what would happen if you multiply that event by a few thousand well-motivated and well-trained American patriots. This will not be the area to work or reside. I am already hearing of people discreetly removing themselves over the next few months to areas elsewhere, including overseas.

    F#cking Karl Marx and his stupid utopian ideas…

    • mark says:

      I would like to know more about the people you mention that are ” discreetly removing themselves over the next few months to areas elsewhere, including overseas.” I find this fascinating and a definite sign that things are truly getting scary.

      I live in a more rural area about 200 miles from D.C., but even so, I myself have considered the possibility of leaving the country. It has never gone past the fantasy stage for me, though, and as I have gotten older now, I have decided I will tough it out and try to be there for my younger neighbors with families, when and if things get ugly.

      But to hear that I’m not the only one who has considered this possibility, and indeed that there are people actually doing it!! This I would like to know more about. Any more details you can offer?

      Thanks for this interesting website and the excellent commentary!

  7. Wayne Wells says:

    Bob Owens is a faux patriot. The only “enemies of the republic” that need to be hunted down are fools like him who can’t handle democracy and the rule of law. Anyone who advocates violence (or even hints at it) because of the possibility of congress exercising its constitutional right to “regulate the militias” ( the constitutions words) is a danger to our republic. He need sto be publically horse-whipped and thrown in jail for treason.

    • will says:

      You’ve just validated the need for the 2nd amendment by your attempt to invalidate the author’s 1st amendment rights.

    • Let me get this straight. The confiscation of the peoples arms, as defined by the 2nd amendment and ruled by SCOUTS as applying to the people all the sudden became undone? Did I miss something recently Mr. Wells or were you sitting with your head in the sand during the Heller and McDonald decisions?

      Second of all we’re talking about basic human rights, rights that are not up to man to legislate away from another despite what you might think. Tell me sir, if the government repealed the first amendment would you not have a right to free speech and freedom of religion tomorrow?

      Go sell your bullshit some place else. We don’t live in a democracy you idiot, we live in a constitutional republic where the laws rule all, not just a few. More specifically the constitution defines a select few things that the government can do, read enumerated powers, yet you support the majority ruling the minority.

      I suggest you learn about republics and their structure and why they exist that way. They are formed to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. But alas, you’d rather twist the law to support your tyranny.

      Mr. Wells, you sir are no patriot. Name me one founding patriot who laid down his arms to the British. If you want my arms sir, Molon Labe, and that sir will be the start of the 2nd American Revolution.

      • Wayne Wells says:

        Your reply to my post just proved my point: that second amendment fanatics are irony-proof. I was advocating extreme measures to show you gun nuts what it feels like to be physically threatened because someone disagrees with you politically. But, as I expected, you took my threats seriously because apparently you think that’s a legitimate way to settle differences of opinion. Bottom line, we have a right to regulate militias and the weapons they carry. And we will. If you don’t like it , move over- seas.

      • Wayne Wells says:

        And another thing: we are a representative democracy, which is a type of republic. It’s oh so tempting to just wish away the substantial overlapping of the two , because it lends a sheen of respectability to your weak arguments about the second amendment. Kind of like the Birthers, where one or two terms redefined means that reality and 200 years of American history can be ignored . You need to get your angry head out of your butt and educate yourself. Buzzwords do not an argument make, son.

      • No, you are arguing for the disarmerment and confiscation of property and that we just bend over and take it.

        I have not argued or stated that currently at this point in time a violent overthrow of the government is necessary. You have.

        You say I need to pull my head out of my ass yet yours is so far up your orifice that you are attempting to disregard human history throughout time. Case in point disregarding what Bob has written about. We have a long history of what happens to people who are disarmed by their governments and you seem to think we should just follow down that same path.

        You’re upset that how dare someone exercise their ability to void their consent to the government. Did you forget that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed?

        Since you’re so smart with regards to gun rights, history, and firearms, answer one question. Answer it or go home.

        No one here has threatened you or done you violence for a difference of opinion. What we have said that an attempt to use force to confiscate our property will result in violence. I guess your superior intellect prevents your reading comprehension from operating.

        So where exactly did I advocate violence for a political disagreement? I guess you’re all for violence as long as it is done by the government, it’s only a problem if a person defends themselves and property.

      • Descendant of Jeremiah Duckworth says:

        Wayne Wells, as a Descendant of Jeremiah Duckworth, a patriot who served in the Warren County Georgia Militia in the Revolutionary War, myself and family have served this nation all over the world to defend the Constitution against all comers. If/when the folks in DC choose to “remove” or circumvent the rights named in it then once more we will fight however is required to defend her still today.

        “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

        We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

        Take due notice of this and govern yourself accordingly.

    • John Van Haecke says:

      Please, Mr. Wells, tell me where in the Constitution is Congress given the authority to “regulate the militias”.

      You can’t, because it’s not there. It is, therefore, left to the states and the people, as provided by the 10th Amendment.

      So now, Mr. Wells, in the coming rebellion, will you take up arms with us, or will you stand opposed?

    • J says:

      Wayne, your logical fallacies are par for this particular course. You are advocating for the removal of the protection of one of my natural rights and, not incidentally, a violation of the oath I took almost two decades ago.

      Curious, who do you consider to be 1st Amendment fanatics? What about 4th Amendment? Shall we horsewhip women that stump for a candidate we don’t like and advocate for an amendment nullifying the 19th?

      I personally couldn’t care less about your meaningless threats. I am entirely too familiar with your ilk. The only threats you make are backed by the state. You, yourself, are not willing or capable of making good your (ironic?) threats. No, you are one of the useful idiots that will cheerfully have the state forcefully remove my means of self-defense since you haven’t the intestinal fortitude to do it yourself.

      Finally, where do you get off deciding who is, or is not, a patriot? Your readiness to see physical harm done to an American citizen for exercising his First Amendment rights proves that you haven’t even the most tenuous grasp on the meaning of patriotism.

    • John Cunningham says:

      “Rule of law”? you mean, I presume, the dictatorial orders of Comrade Urkel and his lefty stooges? this regime was founded in a rebellion against gun grabbers, and it will probably go out in one also. if you think you can horse-whip patriots, give it a try dude. you might end up with a 180-grain necklace if ya get my drift. a couple of dozen DemonRAT politicians hanging from oak trees would be a warming sight, no? kind of like the old Alabama windchimes.

    • iconoclast says:

      Your ignorance of the Constitution is only surpassed by your ignorance regarding the English language. You don’t know the definition of well-regulated and you don’t understand what is a prefactory clause and how it differs from an operative clause. And you do not understand that the Bill of Rights does not grant Americans rights, it recognizes those rights well all have by virtue of being human.

      The right of self-defense, whether against criminals or against tyrannical and abusive governments (whether local, state, or federal) is a human right. That this human right upsets petty tyrants and their followers is, of course, inevitable. Which is why leftists are so excited to disarm more Americans using the fiction that this disarmament will reduce violence. And, when the violence increases despite these supposedly well-intentioned laws, more laws and confiscation will be passed equally ineffective and equally abusive to the basic human right of self-defense.

      As for being horse-whipped out of the country, as Bob pointed out the last residents ejected from the country were those who supported a tyrant–King George. And that ejection was done by what used to be called the yeomanry–every day men (and now women) who form both the spine of this country and the vast bulk of both our armed forces and our police forces. You and your progressive leftist colleagues depend upon others for defense, fear and hate inanimate objects, and desperately seek a state to coddle you like an infant. Keep pushing and you may find yourselves looking around and wondering “where are the people that are supposed to protect me and enforce my anti-human rights initiatives?”

      Yes sir, our society is completely polarized at this point. And if leftists continue to push their agenda over the objections of both history and classical liberals they will discover that the time for compromise can end and one of the political viewpoints will need either a full conversion or a departure. So take care, sir, when wishing to violently punish a voice speaking for classical liberalism and our Constitutional republic. You may find that your fantasies of violence to come true in unexpected ways.

    • Sarah says:

      I support the rule of law. It’s a shame the progressives believe the rule of law means whatever Obama wants, he gets.

      And Wayne, the 2nd amendment doesn’t grant the government the right to “regulate the militia”. The Bill of Rights is a list of prohibitions on government encroachment of natural rights. You can interpret the language all you want and redefine lie to mean truth but you can’t force the rest of us to live inside your twisted little brain.

      • leonard says:

        Sarah, great reply to this wayne person as were all the rest.

        But for some reason I particularly liked yours.

    • Troy Riser says:

      You’re wrong about a number of things, Wayne. Jefferson said/wrote, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” He also said/wrote, “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”

      I have no problems with anti-gun proponents such as yourself or–for that matter–with elected/appointed officials within the Executive and Legislative branches of our government advocating or employing the use of lawful Constitutional mechanisms to amend or repeal the 2nd Amendment. If they should succeed using these constitutional, legal means, then fine. That’s the process, dictated by the rule of law, and I would, as a law-abiding American citizen, abide by it and obey the law. If, however, they should attempt to circumvent the Constitution, then they will–by necessity–have to send armed men to forcibly break into my home and unlawfully confiscate my firearms. They should expect resistance.

      Guns are not symbols of power. Guns are power, and in the United States, power resides with the people. Anything else is tyranny of the State.

      Right now, those would-be tyrants who would take our guns are well-protected, most of them living in secured homes and facilities and surrounded by veritable armies of well-trained and well-armed bodyguards. Everyone with whom they have daily contact believes as they do. There are no contradicting opinions, no one to tell them what they are contemplating is a very bad idea. I’m guessing they’re going to go for it. Too bad for them. Too bad for us, too. Americans are never so ferocious and adept at killing as when we’re killing each other.

    • Phelps says:

      Democracy and rule of law are fine as far as they go. Ultimately, however, it comes back to Justice.

      Justice carries a sword.

      • Troy Riser says:

        Democracy and rule of law are all we’ve got. It’s what patriots aim to preserve and protect. That vague, high-sounding bit you wrote about ‘Justice carries a sword’ means nothing at all. If you’re talking about a common personification of Justice used by artists and sculptors, you’ll also notice Justice is commonly blindfolded and carries a set of scales as well as a sword. Those are symbols, not the basis of an argument; that is, if you were actually making an argument of some kind. It was hard to tell.

    • Coldsteel1983 says:

      Good luck with your efforts, Wayne, you’ll need it.

      This issue is only one of several which have what was once a nation polarized and edging closer to confrontation as positions harden and voices in the crowd get louder.

      I believe that the only hope for this once nation is to accept that we’re going to end up with a different political reality and map, with at best a loose allegiance to a much changed Federal Government. The differing views that now exist cannot co-exist and will take us to a level or disagreement leading to violent confrontation.

      There is no need for violence of any kind, but it will come because the liberal/progressives will push those who disagree into a position where they are clearly refusing the governments “authority” and in order to establish that claim, force will be initiated by the government and lead to a response, of and by the people.

      You want to “horse-whip” someone?

      I’m your huckleberry.

      Jeff B.

    • J Gibbs, PhD says:

      Mr Wells:

      While I respect your rights under the First Amendment to voice your opinion, I have to disagree with “your” interpetation of the Second Am. The wording is “A well regulated militia being nessacary for a free state,…” During the 1700′s and even today, the term “well regulated” when used in this fashion is in reference to “well supplied” and “well armed”. In military terms “regulars” are troops that have training and modern arms and supplies to be used in defense. They are often the first response force. During the 1700′s, militias, as the term used in the Am.II, were are are the people. These militias were to be well armed and supplied, i.e. well regulated, so they could respond rapidly to an enemy force or criminal gang. Since our founding fathers did not like the idea of a standing army, the militias were to fill this role and buy time for Congress to raise an army to repell agression.

      It is the intent of the II Amd. to keep the citizens free from tyranny of governments, which they had just fought a long and bloody war to be free from. The founders understood that governemnts often go corrupt and power hungry and will become tyrannical and oppressive to freedom and liberty. Histroy proves this over and over again. Thus, the “state” not a national government is where the jux of the power was to remain, and the citizen militia was intended to keep them free from internal and external dictators.

      So, your history is very wrong, as you attempt to use “your” understanding of the term “well regulated”. May I suggest you do a little historical research into terminology? Anytime one wishes to understand the words and phrases of another time and culture, one has to place themselves into that “time and culture” to make the correct translation. Archeologists do this all the time, so study the writings of our founders. You will see with overwhelming evidence their meanings and intents of these words.

      “Well regulated” is a well supplied, equiped and armed citizen militia. “…the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and BEAR arms shall NOT be infringed.” Is about as clear as any sane and honest man can make it. Why do freedom haters refuse to see something so plain? Because they want to.

  8. Chris Watson says:

    I’ve said that Balkanization would be one of the largest challenges of a post-Revolution America particularly since I firmly believe that succession is a real and dire threat to the Republic if such a law for banning and seizure is passed.

    I can see entire State houses and Governors just openly declaring that with the abrogation – I’m being specific with my language here – of the Constitution with the several states that they have no choice but to secede.

    DC, VA, WV, and MD remain the Federal States, Texas and Utah withdraw quickly (they’ve been looking for an excuse), Montana and Wyoming become one of the worlds largest nuclear powers, and the rest of the country fractures into regional enclaves.

    The real danger is the call by the Federal States for foreign assistance with the Chinese and UN responding to quell internal dissension. If it wasn’t ‘game on’ before, it sure would be then.

    Then again, I write SciFi and Alternate History for fun…

    • Poshboy says:

      Virginia will NOT be part of any Federal district. Perhaps the county of Arlington and the cities of Alexandria and Falls Church might remain under Federal jurisdiction, but everything west of the Beltway will be in Free America.

      History seems to want to repeat itself when it comes to the political geographic disposition of my Commonwealth. It’s how Virginia found itself fighting the first Civil War.

      • Chris Watson says:

        I live in PWC so that may very well be the DMZ south of DC

      • Poshboy says:

        And I have relatives residing in Fairfax and Fauquier Counties, too. CW, I think we are both screwed, just like my ancestors who were living in the Shenandoah Valley, c. 1864. Both armies practiced a lot of manuevering and did not much respect private property or civilians.

        NoVa…the next DMZ. Incredible.

      • sofa says:

        NoVa = Overwhelmingly Blue

        As always, Shennandoah and Rappahannock become natural boundaries.

        There will be a Norfolk containment zone.

        “Virginia” Virgina yearns to be free.
        It will be like Kansas for a while.
        But the kin of Jefferson, Henry, Jackson, and Lee will sort out the Tories.

  9. thebronze says:

    Be careful what you wish for.

    The gun-grabbers will regret this.

  10. Phillip Parham says:

    I realize most on this forum will not bother to write congresscritters and for good reason. I normally would not bother. The problem as I see it this time and the impending implications of not doing so leaves them thinking they have nothing to fear from a population of sheeple. For once I felt compelled to remind them we are not all sheeple. Below is what I felt compelled to send my Arizona Senators and Rep this time to ensure they know at least one person will not comply.

    I am a United States Army retiree who has spent my entire adult life sworn to protect our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I view the attack on legal gun owners as a direct attack against our Constitution and the amendments. The argument that our forefathers did not expect us to own so called “assault rifles” and magazines with multiple rounds is absurd. They did expect us to maintain a level of arms reasonably equal to the government. It was clear in their writings the purpose was the prevent the government from becoming tyranical in nature and a threat to the civilian population. What is currently taking place in our country by the political class borders on treason. Using the deaths of innocents by deranged individuals does not give the government the right to disarm law abiding citizens exercising their God given rights.

    I urge you to vehemently oppose any efforts to illegally disarm law abiding citizens. My wife and I will not be disarmed by zealots in direct violation of our Constitutional rights. History is replete with governments who disarmed the population leaving them at the mercy of tyrants who then proceeded to slaughter the people. Since the beginning of the 20th century over 200 million people died by democide. We will not be subject to this usurpation of power, we will not turn in our arms, we will not comply with illegal legislation, and we will not go willingly into the ovens of history.

    Stand with the people.

    • John Van Haecke says:

      Outstanding!

      I am retired Air Force, and I, too, still feel bound by my oath of enlistment.

      Forgive me if I plagiarize your writing.

  11. A says:

    While I think that Sarajevo can’t be discounted – certainly the potential is there – I think that any conflict in the US might more closely resemble what the Irish went through with the IRA and it various factions and flavors of severity.

    Hopefully, enough US Citizens will write in to their representatives to stop this thing in its tracks.

    Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year.

    • Poshboy says:

      I think urban conflicts will be on the line of Northern Ireland (NI). Vehicle checkpoints, military “safe” zones, a controlled media that no one believes, samizdat publications and Websites, disinformation, and populations who in large numbers are non-combatively supporting one side or another to various degrees.

      However…there will be one big difference.

      The IRA and to a lesser extent the Unionists were always beset by firearms and ammunition shortages. It was difficult to acquire enough firearms and the British Army deployed numerous intelligence assets to hinder the IRA’s arms activities, especially the skilled operatives of 14 Company. Notably, the IRA also had at most only 200 active assets hidden within a sympathetic population. And their political goal ultimately was a hard socialist Irish Republic, which was not broadcast widely because the IRA knew that was not a winning idea amongst their supporters.

      As for the score on this side of the pond…

      With in the last month in the United States, there have been 10 million firearms and over a billion rounds of ammo sold, and on top of that, an estimated 30 million existing semi-auto battle rifles, plus 120 million bolt-action/scoped hunting rifles or vintage military surplus, 40 million concealable handguns, and (my guess) at least five to seven billion rounds of ammunition now in civilian storage from decades of acquisition. And most importantly, the specialized training of millions of veterans, sympathetic Americans, and undiscovered patriots to accurately use millions of those arms to preserve Liberty and our Constitution. And their motivation? Just read blogs and listen to talk radio…this nation is fired up right now to preserve our historic Bill of Rights. I can only imagine what a few more weeks of this kind of drumbeat will do.

      I imagine that you will also have National Guard and Reserve armories cleaned out of stocks, as well as those units of the active Army whose members refuse to obey a blatantly unconstitutional order and remember their oath.

      Heavier stuff will not enter into the equation; the maintenance and supply chain problems—plus desertion of the mechanics—will render those large pieces of immobile steel. If some do move, they will provide a dramatic background for someone to stand upon, much like Boris Yeltsin did in Moscow during the 1991 coup attempt, using that BTR-80 APC appealing to the MVD internal security troops and their loyalty to the Russian people. It didn’t hurt that most of the MVD troops were conscripts. We will see similar public statements here—and those episodes will make political careers for yet-unknown Americans.

      God help us all if the US Senate is stupid enough to pass their disgusting Intolerable Act. I fear many people will not understand that vote does not make it law and act hastily. Then we all get sucked into this unnecessary nonsense.

      This is not Northern Ireland. This country is a Western, educated, heavily armed, and Liberty-focused Yemen. Those fighting a decentralized 4GW force such as the American people will not last long. My prediction is that it will be over quickly, much like what happened in 1989 Romania, once the security service (Securitate) and rump loyalist Army were neutralized.

      We may actually have in American history a similar visual of the fate of the Ceausescus. I never thought in a million years I would ever have witnessed something like that in this nation. Absolutely unbelievable.

  12. emdfl says:

    Too bad John Ross’s book is out of print. A copy sent to each and every one of the 535(+1) playing this new game MIGHT wake a few of them up – or not.
    Personally I think a class action law-suit should be filed against most if not all of them starting with violation of oath of offfices and moving along to attwmpted violation of the constitutional rights of the people.

    • Poshboy says:

      The criminal law is already on the books:

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241

      18 USC 241 – Conspiracy against rights.

      If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same…they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both…

      I’m sure the Attorney General will be quickly enforcing this one.

  13. ManekiNeko says:

    I suggest reading “Coup D’Etat, A Practical Handbook” by Edward Luttwak. He asserts
    that a coup in America would inevitably turn into civil war. I don’t think he ever considered what would happen if the population rose up against the government.
    Though I think “rose up” might not be strictly correct since it would certainly be a
    hit and run guerrilla war initially mostly aimed at the leadership, means of mass communications, other infrastructure used by the regime, etc. (in that respect, a lot like a coup).

    While the “rifle behind every blade of grass” statement may not be real, this one is:
    “The fiercest serpent may be overcome by a swarm of ants.” Isoroku Yamamoto

    • Phelps says:

      Remember, also, that this will be 4GW. It won’t simply be the uniformed combatants that are targets — the compliant media will be valid military targets (as Clinton decreed in Yugoslavia) along with all the G-whatever drones in the alphabet soup agencies. How may forest rangers and beef inspectors have to come under fire before the entire federal government seizes up?

      • ManekiNeko says:

        The means of mass communications are always targets during a coup. Including the members of the media if they get in the way of or defy the coup makers and are within their reach. See Luttwak.

        Your point that even minor representatives of the regime are potential targets is also possible. The coup makers would want to control all essential resources, and, again, would have to deal with anyone getting in their way. But I expect that higher officials, i.e., ones with real power, would be the ones initially targeted. Again see Luttwak.

        Luttwak’s main point was that the US is too big and that all the
        normal targets for a coup are too geographically dispersed for coup makers to be able to take over them all. Some geographic areas and resources would end up being controlled by the regime and some by the coup makers. Hence civil war. However, I think this argument doesn’t take into account the possibility of a popular revolt, i.e., a coup by the general population all over the country.

        The regime does have strategic weapons including nukes. But that doesn’t do them much good because those weapons are intended for use against cities and other large targets. Targets that would be under their control (at least initially). That largely
        leaves small arms, where the Feds would probably be substantially outnumbered. That is a bad position to be in (see google for “n-squared law of firepower”).

        If I recall correctly, only a small percentage of the population were active combatants for the Colonies during the Revolutionary War. I think modern means of transportation and communication imply that an even smaller percentage of combatants would be required to get the ball rolling (and to keep it rolling) this time around.

        They didn’t teach this when I was in school, but recent analyses suggest that it was the attempt by the British to seize arms and ammunition (and block their importation) that was the primary trigger for the Revolution. Denial of other rights, including taxation without representation, much less so. A huge gun grab by the Feds would be a *very* volatile situation.

        I have always felt that there would be an Article V convention convened before armed insurrection (or anything similar) became even remotely possible. But as time passes I become less sure.

      • Rastech says:

        @ MN
        “They didn’t teach this when I was in school, but recent analyses suggest that it was the attempt by the British to seize arms and ammunition (and block their importation) that was the primary trigger for the Revolution”

        I’m now convinced that the assault on the Common Law by ‘enemies foreign and domestic’, led by the Lord Chief Justice William Murray, First Earl of Mansfield, and his leaning on Sir William Blackstone to include some deliberate errors in his “Commentaries on the Laws of England”, are the real cause. He was utterly despised by the likes of William Pitt, and for very good reasons. Your Founding Fathers knew the score, and could see the writing on the wall for a return of the lawless State.

        In 1829 President John Quincy Adams described him as “more responsible for the Revolution than any other man”.

        Whatever happened to America’s first Bill of Rights by the way? Granted in gratitude for support during the 1688 Glorious Revolution, and delivered circa 1700 AD.

        It seems to have disappeared (and I would love a copy).

  14. Joe says:

    The gun-grabbers and those in Washington and around the country who want to “regulate the militias” never mention anything about the huge underground black-market of weaponry in this country. It’s where the felons and other criminals who can’t pass background checks buy their guns.
    The black-market in weapons is never mentioned in the mainstream media, the politicians never mention it, no one does.
    The gun-grabbers would take away guns from law-abiding citizens while the underground black-market for weapons remains in business for the criminals. One would think the gun-grabbers (supposedly so upset about gun violence and crime) would try to put an end to the black-market, but they never even mention it — let alone try to end it or put a dent into it, so I know they’re full of shit.
    Right now we’re living under a communist government. Right now it’s communist-lite. If Uncle Sam takes away the guns from America’s law-abiding citizens, we will be living in a total communist state — very similiar to the old Soviet Union. It’s the real reason to take away our guns — to throw us into communist tyranny.
    Americans — especially White Americans — will be murdered in large numbers if we give up our guns. Read the history of the Soviet Union and what happened to white, Caucasian Russians after Russia fell to the communists. The whites in Russia were slaugthered, starved, and brutally murdered — in the millions.

  15. A says:

    I would ask that anyone reading or commenting here right their governor, mayor and state representatives letting them know their concerns about gun control and the infringement of our Second Amendment Rights. That is our duty as Citizens. The NRA and Gun Owners of America both have automated systems to do this in just a few seconds.

    Additionally, everyone should begin keeping a small list of the elected officials in their State/County/City who are supporting or promoting any gun control laws. They are counting on the 2014 elections being so far off that by the time they come around we will all have ‘forgotten’ about their conspiracy to strip us of our most important right.

    I think many of us fail to realize that the various democrats and ‘Lefties’ are riding a wave of euphoria post 2012 election. Probably not too dissimilar from a drug users high and they, frankly, probably have no idea what they are doing.

    God Bless

  16. Steven says:

    @ Wayne: Sir, I will address your comments directly.
    The basis of our government to exercise authority, or for legitimacy for our government at all, is our Constitution. Our Constitution set forth an idea of a limited government, it’s primary purpose being to secure the freedoms of its’ people, preserve the rule of law, to conduct diplomacy and our foreign affairs, and to provide a military. All the expansions and bureaucracies are add-ons and extras.

    If you or I were given a primary job, and decided to add all sorts of secondary and tertiary duties, but we were completely failing our primary mission, it could be rightfully argued that we had failed.

    “Congressional Right” : doesn’t exist. Government has no rights. Government has enumerated powers ALLOWED to it to accomplish its’ primary goal.

    “Regulate the militias” is a misnomer. The original meaning of a “well regulated militia” is not what you think. That’s not my opinion, that’s a simple dictionary definition from the time of the writing. “Well regulated” meant in good working order, well drilled, practiced, operable in a practical fashion. Due to the morphing of language over time, and driven primarily by the growth of government and subsequent voluminous amount of regulations government needs to act, people who make this argument are either regurgitating what they heard because it supports their given ideology or, worse, are knowingly lying.

    As to Bob Owens being whipped for expressing his dismay, horror, and foreboding that our rights to defense against tyranny, perhaps you’d like to re-think what you are saying. I’m sure you yourself are passionate pro and con on several issues, but I don’t imagine you’d support your own whipping for any reason, nor under any circumstance.

    And that goes to the core of what people like Bob Owens, or many others who post here think: We are not ruled by those who have one set of laws for themselves, often from which they exempt themselves, and another set of rules and / or laws for the peasantry. Freedom minded people want to be able to keep self-determination alive. We do not mind if YOU want to submit to government and its’ safety nets, although I object to me paying for your laying about, but instead want the freedom to live our lives without those that call themselves our servants making decisions, laws, rules, regulations, and presidential edicts, from which they immediately exempt themselves.

    Our elected leaders at the federal, state, and local level, have seen fit to create SWAT teams by citing the need to be able to respond to violent threats. I do not begrudge them those highly trained men and women of valor. I do however have a problem with those same politicians, protected by multiple rings of security, which are electronic, physical, and by several armed personnel whose sole purpose is to “game out” threats, deciding FOR ME, that I have no inherent right to self defense.

    Also, like many here on this site I am a veteran who has seen combat and lived in a war zone. I have seen how in Iraq and Afghanistan the U.S. forces have allowed each family in those countries to keep a FULLY AUTOMATIC AK-47 in their homes, because it was deemed necessary for home defense and against the TYRANNY of the local war lords.

    And I want to state, unequivocally, that I have great affection for our LEOs. Having “played cop” in those same war zones I have a keen appreciation for LEOs singular point of view, difficulty of their job, and great respect for their bravery. They too run towards the sound of gun fire, disregarding their own safety, so that others may live.

    None of us want to “go and kill the pigs” – that’s absurd. I will however not look at a police officer AS A police officer if he or she is violating their oath and acting as a thug for the state. They have decided at that point that their own safety, their pension, and their comfort is more important than my basic human right to self determination, my inherent right to self defense, and our mutual social contract of my support for their authority, as long as it is practiced according to the law.

    I hope I have added to the discussion.

    Steven

  17. Larry says:

    Y’know, I’ve been quietly reading all these posts and comments for quite a while now, and I thought I’d interject something that hasn’t been iterated by anyone so far in the hundreds of blogs and posts I’ve read since this gun control issue arrived in the wake of Sandy Hook.

    Anyone of conscience has observed this at one time or another in their life. You’re in a group situation, be it at work or in the classroom or city council meeting, etc, and you propose an idea or ideology that the majority agree with, but only in small groups. No one would dare raise that issue in a public forum, but YOU’RE the one who says it openly and expect your peers to stand with you. You look around…everyone lowers their head…they can’t believe you just said that. No one’s there to watch your back. Everyone has lost their voice, their moral courage abandoning them when you need them the most. Or, to put it more simply. It’s what is called the one sheep effect.

    The sheep are in the field grazing. Along comes the wolf, eyeing the flock. One sheep, Fred, raises his head and makes eye contact with the wolf. Another sheep, George, looks at Fred with wide-eyed astonishment and says, “Fred, WTF are you doing, man?” Fred says, “There’s a wolf over there.” George says, “I know there’s a wolf over there. We ALL know there’s a wolf over there. He’s only going to pick one of us to eat. If he sees you looking at him, you’re the one that gets eaten. So, we all keep our head down and pretend we don’t know he’s there so, hopefully, we’re not the one he chooses next to eat.” To which George replies, “But, if we ALL raise our heads together, he can’t eat all of us at once and then we can all join together and drive him off and be rid of him once and for all.” To which Fred replies, “Are you going to be the first one to raise your head…and hope we all unite with you? Because as soon as you make eye contact with him, he knows you saw him and you’ll be the one he eats because he knows from past experience that we are all too afraid to be the first one. He knows that our comrades will not back us up. So, it’s always been easy pickin’s for him. As long as we all keep our heads down…yes, we know that life should, and could, be better. But, it’s hard to get everyone united. Sure, things are bad, but not THAT bad. So, just keep your head down, goddamn it, and shut the **** up!”

    That’s what’s happened to our country. Most of us know that we’re enslaved to the oligarchy (wolf). Well, I think that America, the world, needs this gun control issue to galvanize us to all raise our heads, finally, after years of suppression and control, to take back what has been stolen from us. Suppressed technologies, free energy, world abundance, huge sums of gold and silver, cures for cancer, the end to all wars, poverty, drugs, global suffering, child sex slavery, innocent people in prison, chemtrails, mind control, flouride, pollution, GMO crops, banksters (mobsters) running and ruining our economies, the illegal IRS, Federal Reserve, the controlled media. The list is endless. It’s time to take back our world.

    This gun grab is our galvanizing line in the sand. What if…what if Obama is really a good guy? What if he’s doing this on purpose to drive us to raise our collective heads, to finally look the wolf in the eyes and say, NO MORE!!” Without the threat of removing our liberties through disarming us, we would still be telling our neighbor, “Shut up and keep your head down. It’s not THAT bad.”

    I’ve never seen so many people become so outraged over any issue, ever…as this. People are ready to go to war and die rather than give up their guns. Finally. Good for you. We all grew a pair. Maybe, by just the fact that we’re standing up for ourselves and willing to make a stand, putting our lives on the line to defend our rights, property and families, willing to die for the cause, that there will be a showdown at the O.K. Corral.

    But, the soldiers in uniform might just say “Forget it. I’m going home to my family. I will honor the oath I took to protect our freedoms from invaders, foreign and domestic. I will not fight my brothers and sisters.” And lay down their arms without too much, or any, bloodshed. I think we should bless this opportunity that’s being presented to us by Feinstein, Obama, Biden, Bush, Clinton, and their ilk, to finally grow a pair and fight for freedom. It’s time. Game on.

    Larry

  18. Big Dog says:

    Great post Larry- spot on. I’m raising my head and hope everyone else will do it simultaneously.

  19. JohnMc says:

    To paraphrase — “You keep using that Amendment. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”

    Hopefully the only person who grabs my guns are the next person ready to take up the cause because it means I am dead. But seriously I don’t think some of you readily understand the 2nd. Example –

    “Please, Mr. Wells, tell me where in the Constitution is Congress given the authority to “regulate the militias”.”

    I would direct your attention to the first and second Militia Acts for a cognitive answer. They are important becuase most of the men who drafted those two acts were the very same men who just several years before carried arms against the British. Many of them drafters of the Constitution. So we are talking original intent kind of stuff here.

    * Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, to call forth such number of the militia of the state or states most convenient to the place of danger or scene of action as he may judge necessary to repel such invasion, and to issue his orders for that purpose, to such officer or officers of the militia as he shall think proper; and in case of an insurrection in any state, against the government thereof, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, on application of the legislature of such state, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) to call forth such number of the militia of any other state or states, as may be applied for, or as he may judge sufficient to suppress such insurrection.

    So yes the President is authorized to call up the militia for purposes of invasion/rebellion.

    And who were the Militia in the eyes of the Founders? –

    * Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.

    Another words it was the whole body of the country. And please note that as they viewed it, the Militia were specifically distinct from regualar army service. (why else would the Founders have assigned seperate Courts Martial??) And the Militia as they viewed it were NOT the national guard a concept they had not even conceived or expected. What the Founders expected was something similar to the Swiss model of domestic defense which has considerable merit.

    Hopefully I have not burst many bubbles. If you don’t believe what you is posted then go look it up yourself. But this is original intent as the post revolutionay war movers and shakers viewed the second amendment. If you put the puzzle of how the 2nd is written with the outline of what the Militia Acts considered as an implementation of the 2nd it all fits quite well. And to the gun grabbers — there is no way 2nd is not an individual right, the Militia Act expected the militiaman to provide his own firearm.

    That is all.

  20. Oldfart says:

    “But, the soldiers in uniform might just say “Forget it. I’m going home to my family.”

    Kinda difficult for those in Afghanistan, Korea, the thirty or so different countries in Africa and the middle east. Y’don’t think it was planned that way, do ya?

    Odumbo has been planning for this for awhile. We’ve been busy bashing Romney, Palin and each of the GOP hopefuls as they rose to the top of the swill. We have one more chance to keep America American. We’d better not screw it up.

  21. Bubba says:

    The 2nd Amendment means exactly what serious people with guns say it means.

    I, my brothers and my children along with all my friends are very well regulated.

  22. Rastech says:

    There are only three forms of pure Government. They are Democracy, Aristocracy, and Monarchy/Dictatorship (which includes a term limited Dictator, called a President). Anything else other than a balanced Republic under the Rule of Law, no matter the label, is just a greater or lesser corruption of those three. Each has indispensable strengths, and each has a fatal, self destructive flaw. They all end the same way, with factionalism, cat fights, and power grabs, and end up diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law, as lawless States (a lawless State is defined by “The Law is what we say it is”, because making Law, is the exercise of power). Each is incompatible with the Rule of Law, because nobody can be trusted with power, and all you get is a lawless State.
    This is why Republics have legislative bodies rather than Law making bodies, and all legislation must comply with the Law to be lawful, otherwise the legislation is illegal and void. Power is placed in the custody of the Law for safe keeping, which is why the Rule of Law is literal. It does indeed mean what it says.

    Nobody will like a lawless State, because literally nobody, no matter their means, or their station in Society, is safe in one. Those most active in its creation, are its first victims, because “The Law is what we say it is” is paranoid and knows that such people are untrustworthy, and will assassinate “The Law is what we say it is” at the first opportunity after they realise there is no place for them in the lawless State Regime.
    No Contract, Treaty, Arrangement, Agreement, Understanding, Right, Liberty, or Freedom is safe in a lawless State, because the Law will change on whim, mood, temper, or for convenience, and the Law is no longer worth the paper it is printed on.
    Those who think they are going to be kingpins in a lawless State, become rapidly disillusioned as their brains splatter against a wall. They think they are badass, but won’t believe just how badass the person that takes them out really is. They are little league in comparison, and don’t even begin to know which side is up.
    Throughout human history, the lawless State has never worked. Not once. Ever. It won’t work now either, and it won’t work in the future.
    That’s the nitty gritty of what this is all about, and the vast majority of Democrats want to live safe and free under the Rule of Law, the vast majority of Republicans want to live safe and free under the Rule of Law, and the vast majority of everybody else wants to live safe and free under the Rule of Law.
    Stand by your Constitution, Bill of Rights, Common Law, and remake your balanced Republic, with an independent Judiciary and Jury of Your Peers, all under the Rule of Law, and you will have something that works.
    It’s the only thing in the history of our species, that has ever worked.
    Fight for it tooth and nail, because the only alternative will most assuredly destroy you ALL.

    • Law dog says:

      Under rule of law, there is no such thing as a balanced representative republic, only a monarchy, with the government having all say and everyone else being nothing more than slaves. Research the originator and first source definer of the term. Albert Venn Dicey. Find the source paper he wrote. That, and only that, is the true rule of law. Everything written under or about the rule of law in the last 35 years has been an intentional misdirect by the communist Democrats foisted on the sheeple.

    • PJ says:

      “Stand by your Constitution, Bill of Rights, Common Law, and remake your balanced Republic, with an independent Judiciary and Jury of Your Peers, all under the Rule of Law, and you will have something that works.”

      I don’t mind if you are fond of these things. To me they are just the fig leaves that cover what we really have in this country, an oligarchy in a parasitic relationship to the rest of the people, looting and plundering and living it up on our dime.

      But hey, if you want that stuff, who am I to complain? Have it. But I tell you, when this war is over, you are going to have to make room for the people who don’t care for it. If you seek to impose on us, you will get the same thing that the former US ruling class is going to get.

      If people, especially battle-hardened people, want to be left alone, it’s a very, very good idea to leave them alone.

  23. Rastech says:

    Your Rights, Liberties, and Freedoms, are your Birthright.

    No Government can lawfully or legitimately, deny you your Birthright.

    Good luck to you all from across The Pond. We have the same struggle starting here.

  24. Law dog says:

    First, we have to take back the grammatical high ground. Research albert venn dicey, the source author of the term rule of law. Rule of law, from the originator is pure government is god communism. Don’t be swayed by current media use of the term, FIND THE SOURCE and study it.
    Next, we have to realize that under the constitution, the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. What we have in washington now, fits none of the definition, so it is not the government. It is the insurgents. In short, if you are keeping the oath of office, you are with us and one of us. If you are not complying with your oath of office, you are not one of us, you are not a member of the government, and you are to be considered an enemy combatant insurgent.

  25. Law dog says:

    Next, we must completely cease using the term “state” where we should be using sovereign country. Reason- a state, by it’s ver definition is a subordinate member of a larger, controlling, entity with dominion over the state. We are a country. No one has dominion or any say over what we do and what we are, but us- the United States of America. Where we now have a criminal bunch of thug insurgents claiming dominion over we the people, we should have law abiding, constitution following professional – we the people. Since technically, G employees all work for -we the people- and can not have their jobs without taking the oath of office, the minute they forsake the oath, they have just chosen to break their contractual obligations, and have technically quit. If they continue to receive pay after renouncing their oath of office, then they arevalso defrauding the taxpayer.

  26. Virgil Lloyd says:

    I spent twenty seven months in Vietnam just to come home to a country being ravaged by the anti-war sentiment of the same crew that has Morphed into what Obama’s entire entourage is now in power. At that time, I was apprehensive at what the future would be for our country. This feeling was minute compared to the feeling I got yesterday when I visited a gunshop where I went to the police academy. I have never in my life felt the literal electric nerve-tension fear I saw on many of the people there. I could easily tell that many were either first time buyers or not used to handling or even purchasing them. BUT….. All were there for the same reason.. Fear. Not of others, but fear of an unknown danger that is coming out of a communist third-world attempt to overthrow our country and turn it into a place where we are all slaves of that dictator. Any person who has served in the military is aware of what awaits us if this takeover is accomplished, and it matters not whether it was WWII,Korea, VietNam, Desert Storm, Afghan theatre or whatever country with dictatorships and military/marshall laws. They FEAR this loss of personal rights and freedoms more than death itself. Like a woman who is being raped and has no way to fight back once it starts, if she has the weapon to use first, she WILL. I have long (as ex-LEO) held the premise that I would rather face ten angry men with guns than one scared woman with one….. The WOMAN will EMPTY the gun on you and reload to do it again if you even move.! Think of people losing their Rights and freedoms as that woman and you have the “Perfect Storm”. There isn’t enough money in the world for me to ever defend the bunch in Whitehouse (and CZARS). I can only imagine the sentiment in the military is going to be at least 50% similar.
    Being too old to do much but try to defend myself and my wife if I can, I will have to let someone else carry the argument to the ones needing to hear it, but like any old dog……… not good to corner him.! Leave me alone. I didn’t fight for this country so some “Bill Ayres Groupy” could take it all away from the people who have given their lives and efforts to make it what it was before he got hold of it. My eyes are full of tears for my country and the citizens who love it… God help us, and protect us AGAIN..