# Hypothetically discussion how would you survive



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

Okay completely hypothetically let's pretend Marshal law happened and they came for our guns or hitliary gets in and try to seize them. What would you do turn them in? Hide them ? Try and fight back? If you hide them how ? Like I said this was just to create conversation


----------



## Tweto (Nov 26, 2011)

Before we would know how to proceed we would need to know the process of confiscation. Will the government confiscate based on house to house or would they just go after known firearms owners based on CCW licenses or hunting licenses, or ATF records, or Charge card records of firearm purchases. There's always the possibility that it will be made illegal to possess a gun and you are expected to just turn it in voluntarily and there will be no physical confiscation.

If the government is doing the confiscation based on known records then they will strongly suspect you have firearms and even what firearms. If it is house to house then they don't know.

If the government knows you have firearms then you had better have firearms or a police record of having them stolen.

Which is it?


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

Let's say both since it's hypothetically. Let's say they start with license and the go house to house to be sure


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

shawn_c2000 said:


> Okay completely hypothetically let's pretend Marshal law happened and they came for our guns or hitliary gets in and try to seize them. What would you do turn them in? Hide them ? Try and fight back? If you hide them how ? Like I said this was just to create conversation


Has the U.S. Constitution been legally replaced by another Constitution (no second amendment rights?)?


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

Let's say the first and second amendment is gone along with the fifth and dew process


----------



## bigg777 (Mar 18, 2013)

Hypothetically, let's just say that private sales are allowed in the state you live in and that how and where they would be hidden is no one else's business.


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

In my state they are


----------



## ZoomZoom (Dec 18, 2009)

shawn_c2000 said:


> Let's say the first and second amendment is gone along with the fifth and dew process


If that's the case, it's game on.

They can get my guns but they're going to get all my ammo first, through the barrel.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

> Has the U.S. Constitution been legally replaced by another Constitution (no second amendment rights?)?





shawn_c2000 said:


> Let's say the first and second amendment is gone along with the fifth and dew process


My religious beliefs instruct me to obey man laws as long as they don't contradict God's laws. Under your scenario guidelines I would turn in my firearms as directed by the new Reich.

But on the other hand I'd still have my State's constitutional authority to own and process, plus there is the terrible canoe accident where my firearms ended up lost during the attempted river crossing. Horrible. Just horrible.


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

That was my first thought also but a couple of side thoughts to think about is (1. The easiest way to HELP the start of gun control is to stop ammo production yes people reload but what about when those supply's run dry. 2)also the military or Leo that does the confiscations has the advantages training, timing, and force by numbers.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis (May 20, 2012)

It is the duty of every free person to resist and defeat tyranny. I, and I suspect enough others including law enforcement and military, would resist your scenario wholeheartedly with all of the resources at my disposal. If you are asking for a direct declaration on a public forum that anyone would hide firearms and ammunition for the purposes of resisting a "lawful" order I can't help you more than that.

Here is a good quote from the declaration of independence ...

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.


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

No not asking just pondering in my free time if it helps my scenario would be to flee to the woods and survive off the land for a bit as that is what I am truly familiar with and eventually find like mind people to gear up and go for it


----------



## CrackbottomLouis (May 20, 2012)

Preparing ahead of time for a variety of scenarios is always a good thing. Being well versed in local area knowledge, land navigation, marksmanship skills etc can be useful in bad times. Being self sufficient even in a bug out scenario is feasible with prior planning. Caches of essential goods can be prestaged in likely areas and relationships with like minded individuals should be made ahead of time so we have a community of skilled individuals to draw upon should the need arise. Self defense training is available for individuals and groups. Check out Max Velocity. Wandering off into the woods with a small backpack should always be the last resort of a prepared individual. Good to be comfortable with the idea and trained for it but a last resort nonetheless. Just my opinion.


----------



## Tweto (Nov 26, 2011)

shawn_c2000 said:


> No not asking just pondering in my free time if it helps my scenario would be to flee to the woods and survive off the land for a bit as that is what I am truly familiar with and eventually find like mind people to gear up and go for it


Fleeing to the woods and surviving is a pipe dream. If even a small percentage of people do this there won't be any game left in a month or 2. There is an exception to this, if you flee to the woods in Alaska or Canada and just a few places in Northwest US.

Also, those people you meet in the woods may not be your friends, but it may be to late at that point.


----------



## shawn_c2000 (Jul 18, 2016)

Good opinion also thanks for the training info


----------



## sgtusmc98 (Sep 8, 2013)

This is a hard question, the problem many people will have is deciding when to draw the line in the sand. I was first a Marine and then a preacher, some text from the Bible can make this confusing but I do believe some of the talk of government obedience had to do with Rome, the Jews expected a military leader to take them from Roman control and that wasn't Jesus' plan, He was here for spiritual salvation so He made a point to not attack Rome, like on the tax issue. For more on that you can research Josephus and the fall of Jerusalem in 79 AD. 

Getting to the Marine part I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States from both foreign and domestic threats and I pray to God that I will when the time comes.

The United States is NOT a just a place it is an idea of freedom that can be crushed by those in Washington if we allow it. We must ask ourselves where the allegiance is, to the idea of freedom or to the corruption of politics and cowardice. I can't re type the history of the Articles of Confederation and the transition to the constitution here but it is clear through research that the founders of this country wanted to ensure that the federal government would not have tyrannical power. The Constitution is a negative document, it says what the federal government can not do more than what it can do. Many believed the Bill of Rights wasn't necessary because of the negative nature of the Constitution but others believed the government would corrupt enough to need the Bill of Rights so they made it mandatory for ratification even though it came after ratification of the Constitution. Think of the most important ways to keep a government in check? Limit free speech the first amendment, what protects the first? The second! And we are squandering it away.

I feel ashamed now, Lord don't let me fall again and sit silently thinking I'm doing well to hide.


----------



## sgtusmc98 (Sep 8, 2013)

Ps that was supposed to be 70 AD.


----------



## Griff (Jan 12, 2013)

Given that the candidate in question is demonstrably corrupt as all get-out, there would nothing to gain politically, as she 
1. could reasonably be assumed to be close to bankruptcy by the past year's media / public relations blitz and resulting defense expenditures. No pay, no play. No bills, no bills. 
2. Would therefore be busy fundraising, and then dealing with the resulting DoJ cover-ups and Congressional hearings, which make for really great press. 

Factoring in the expected "edgy" national mood, ongoing crisis of confidence in the supposed enforcement arm (DHS) and its known opposition by the military, the logistical nightmares involved in moving a butt-load of anything or anyone from the DC area to anywhere else and back again, I just don't see this happening. 

There's also the reverse-psychology angle for political gain as long as we're known to be armed. "Neanderthals or not, our 'heartland people' are a bunch of certifiable bad boys, and it would make them really angry if you decided to call that loan due right now, Mr. Premier. Maybe we could consider a trade of something less...tangible...instead?" 

Hypothetically speaking, of course.


----------



## crabapple (Jan 1, 2012)

shawn_c2000 said:


> Let's say the first and second amendment is gone along with the fifth and dew process


I agree, there is no first amendment, without a second amendment.
I would turn over the known weapons with the threat of suing.
But the unknown is unknown for a reason. :dunno:


----------



## Woody (Nov 11, 2008)

shawn_c2000 said:


> Okay completely hypothetically let's pretend Marshal law happened and they came for our guns or hitliary gets in and try to seize them. What would you do turn them in? Hide them ? Try and fight back? If you hide them how ? Like I said this was just to create conversation


Similar scenarios have been brought up a few times. Be it food, ammo, weapons or whatever. I believe a house to house is out of the question and not a possibility. There simply are too many homes and not enough personnel to accomplish it. For just targeting residences or people known to have weapons&#8230; This is the government we are talking about. How long do you really think it would take any part of it to compile an even semi-accurate list then pass it out to be done? There are simply too many heads on the snake.

Now, could the residing president sign an EO declaring marshal law and make it mandatory to turn in all weapons? Sure. But again, it would have to be a voluntary thing. Would I comply if it was done? Being a law abiding citizen I sure would. But, unfortunately I no longer have any weapons. What I didn't lose in the tragic boating accident I sold to Bob, or Ed, or what's his name before I moved. I'm old and have a terrible memory. If they have a search warrant they are welcome to come in and look. And again, due to personnel, how long do you really think they will have to spend at each residence looking for something?

But just think how pleasant a world it would be without firearms. The world would be a no gun zone. That has worked out swell for places that have declared themselves so.


----------



## Kodeman (Jul 25, 2013)

I surrender NOTHING!


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

> Okay completely hypothetically let's pretend Marshal law happened and they came for our guns
> Let's say they start with license and the go house to house to be sure
> Let's say the first and second amendment is gone along with the fifth and dew process


All of this is already in process. All of this WILL happen. I fully believe none or very few will resist.
California has had a group of police for a year or two who's job is to search homes and remove any guns found there from those members of society that the California law makers have deemed unfit. To my knowledge no one has actively resisted this.

Obviously all of our rights are gradually being slowly eroded and I fully expect this to continue until our 'rights' have all basically disappeared completely at some time in the future.
Additional gun laws will continue to be enacted. Gradually more and more guns, gun parts, ammo, and accessories will be banned, first from being sold then from citizen ownership. For the most part there would be little need to to send out special heavily armed teams to confiscate banned items, they would gradually be encountered through the normal course of everyone's lives. People will pass and banned items will be discovered in the estate and those items turned in. Robberies will occur and banned items will be stolen and later recovered by police then disposed of. Police will search homes for unrelated reasons and discover banned items which will then be disposed of. "See something- Say something" programs will be expanded to include rewards. Neighbors will turn in neighbors.
Why would the those in power rush the process?


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

It would take a long time to do house to house gun confiscations. 44% of US households have guns. There are 124.6 million households according to the Census Bureau. That means there are 52 million households with guns. If they did 10,000 households a day it would take 5200 days or 14 years. Unless they start executing people who resist gun confiscation I would just give them to one of my relatives when they came to our area. I wouldn't give up my guns unless I thought my life was in danger.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

There are countless ways to get people to turn in banned items of any kind. I heard someone on the radio suggest a simple way would be for the gov to freeze your bank accounts until you comply.


----------



## bigg777 (Mar 18, 2013)

hiwall said:


> There are countless ways to get people to turn in banned items of any kind. I heard someone on the radio suggest a simple way would be for the gov to freeze your bank accounts until you comply.


AND, there is one more very good reason for TPTB to push hrd for a cashless society.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis (May 20, 2012)

I like to think we are underestimating willingness to fight back in the American populous. Just because California's are rolling over I don't think that is representative of the rest of the country. That whole state needs to get their act together. Sooner or later there will be someone that fights back over there and it will give the rest of them the courage to stand up for their rights.


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

*Like a box of Chocolates*

It will have to be just like a box of chocolates .

They will just have to open my door and see what they get.


----------



## TimB (Nov 11, 2008)

I don't think it's prudent to say what I feel but if it did come to pass, the end result wouldn't be pretty.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

CrackbottomLouis said:


> I like to think we are underestimating willingness to fight back in the American populous. Just because California's are rolling over I don't think that is representative of the rest of the country. That whole state needs to get their act together. Sooner or later there will be someone that fights back over there and it will give the rest of them the courage to stand up for their rights.


I certainly hope you are correct.
To me it is blatantly obvious that the soapbox and the voting box have failed and the people of this nation must try a different box if they really desire a change back to the freedoms we enjoyed earlier in this nation's history.


----------



## phideaux (Nov 7, 2015)

I'm prepared to meet my maker, matter of fact, I seem to be more anxious in my old age.

So , I'm afraid I wont be worried about what can happen to me, if I stand up for my rights, beliefs , and freedoms.

If they come for me and mine....It may be a rerun of the Alamo.:usaflag:

I still refuse to be afraid of the govmint.




Jim


----------



## Griff (Jan 12, 2013)

hiwall said:


> There are countless ways to get people to turn in banned items of any kind. I heard someone on the radio suggest a simple way would be for the gov to freeze your bank accounts until you comply.


Except those of us who could be considered hypothetical threats to their plans have already developed hypothetical coping strategies to deal with being squeezed by the feds for the past 8 years. Go ahead and tie your thin resources up herding sheep. Win-Win.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

phideaux said:


> I'm prepared to meet my maker, matter of fact, I seem to be more anxious in my old age... So , I'm afraid I wont be worried about what can happen to me, if I stand up for my rights, beliefs , and freedoms... I still refuse to be afraid of the govmint.
> Jim


I'd be with you 100%. Unfortunately I have children with Federal security clearances. So I'd bend more to appease the Reich out of consideration to my children.


----------



## Tirediron (Jul 12, 2010)

yous guys missed a big prepping opportunity here, when they announce the gun grab , you get together with a couple of buddies put on your A$$hole suits, climb in your blacked out suv and go around "interviewing" people: 
Dear sir/ madman do you have any firearms that you would like to turn in??, if they make a fuss tell them that another team will be along to see them, with more paper work, BUT if they comply you take the goods and give them an official looking "receipt". artydance:


----------



## terri9630 (Jun 2, 2016)

Tirediron said:


> yous guys missed a big prepping opportunity here, when they announce the gun grab , you get together with a couple of buddies put on your A$$hole suits, climb in your blacked out suv and go around "interviewing" people:
> Dear sir/ madman do you have any firearms that you would like to turn in??, if they make a fuss tell them that another team will be along to see them, with more paper work, BUT if they comply you take the goods and give them an official looking "receipt". artydance:


I was going to say... Just tell them their guys were there last week and already collected all illegal items.


----------



## Mase92 (Feb 4, 2013)

It would take FAR to long to come door to door. I mean, you realize the enormity of trying to seize 150 Million guns?
We haven't had a successful government program in a LONG time, but...somehow the government is going to muster the ability to do a mass confiscation of that much, get the man power, the budget, the storage facilities and method to transport them?

Not sure how that would be possible. They will, however continue to widdle away at our rights and make it harder for new weapons to be purchased (IE...Mass and Cali) but hitlary, drump or who ever would rather sand paper a wild cats hind quarters in a phone booth than attempt to confiscate weapons by force or not. 

And...last thing, if you think the NWO or blue helms would come in here to attempt that, those meat heads can't even corral rock throwers in a 3rd world country, let alone this country.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

I agree there is no feasible way to physically take the firearms from Americans. They will have to Make those citizens turn them in voluntarily. There are many ways that could be done over a intermediate time period.


----------



## HardCider (Dec 13, 2013)

I'd gladly give up all firearms and ammo if I had any left. I decided yesterday to give them all away to people who needed them more than I do.


----------



## 101airborne (Jan 29, 2010)

Well since the infamous "canoe incident" of 2014 I don't have to worry about it.


----------



## readytogo (Apr 6, 2013)

Since many here are mentioning Marshal Law, the Constitution and its Amendments our Basic Freedom Rights and everything else USA stands for I feel free to mention other things like 300 million people can`t be wrong about democracy or the fact that we have 12 million illegal’s looking for a better life here and not in Mother Russia of wonton China or Cuba; I’m also one of those that escape looking for Freedom and cheese burgess with a nice cold coke; now a nice cold Bud. The resent events in Turkey proved that the people will rise up and defend their rights and freedom. In this country where many have die or defended and die in faraway lands in the name of democracy I sincerely doubt that we will allow tyranny or oppression to take place. My Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America and my oath of Enlistment are very close to my heart and mind, I cherish them like I cherish my family and I can assure anybody that as long as I`m breathing I will protect and defend my democracy and basic freedoms and not a puppet dictator or turncoat and I bet that all here feel the same to include our arm forces. So Hypothetically I don`t think about losing my rights or freedoms I only think about defending them and keep spreading the word about democracy to anybody that is willing to listen or bad mouth it.


----------



## Resto (Sep 7, 2012)

No LEO in his or her Right Mind, would try to go House to house in order to Confiscate Guns in Yuma County Arizona. Sure...Some Federal Idiot might "Declare" Marshal Law. Folks Here would just Laugh. Im Serious. You all saw what our Last Governor did when Obama came here. She didn't even wait for him, she ran out on the Tarmac and Gave him the DI Ass Chewin in front of God and Everyone. That's why Dems don't come here when they run for president. She did that to a "Sitting" President. That's the way people are here. I Love this Place. I figure Sherriff Joes "Tent City" in Maracopa County is going to be expanded if the Feds get stupid. Hes already got a FEMA Camp for Feds. No, I wont be "Turning In" any Guns Thank You, My Neighbors would shoot me before I got to my Truck.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

hiwall said:


> I agree there is no feasible way to physically take the firearms from Americans. They will have to Make those citizens turn them in voluntarily. There are many ways that could be done over a intermediate time period.


Agreed.

Use "Common sense" laws and continue to appointed Communist Supreme Court Justices to neuter the 2nd amendment.

Then require all firearms to be registered. Just a small one time fee of $5 per firearm.

Then make the registration an annual requirement and keep raising the registration fee. Can't afford the fee? Just turn in the firearm!

American Citizens will disarm themselves.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis (May 20, 2012)

TheLazyL said:


> I'd be with you 100%. Unfortunately I have children with Federal security clearances. So I'd bend more to appease the Reich out of consideration to my children.


If it comes to the point of them confiscating firearms, and I'm not saying they can or will, then anyone still working for the government doing so has chosen to be a traitor to the people and will be treated as such. I'm sure a good person like yourself has raised their children to know when it's time to ride the fence and which side to roll off that fence.


----------



## Magus (Dec 1, 2008)

shawn_c2000 said:


> Okay completely hypothetically let's pretend Marshal law happened and they came for our guns or hitliary gets in and try to seize them. What would you do turn them in? Hide them ? Try and fight back? If you hide them how ? Like I said this was just to create conversation


:surrender: ?! 
I'll just listen to some soothing music.








NSFW!!


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

TheLazyL said:


> Has the U.S. Constitution been legally replaced by another Constitution (no second amendment rights?)?


The constitution could be reinterpreted tomorrow. The Supreme Court could decide that the right to own guns does not exist.

Or the president could issue an executive order outlawing gun ownership.

Both are very real possibilities.


----------



## AmmoSgt (Apr 13, 2014)

Let me throw some real world actual fact into the game here I know some will hate that there is several pages of reading involved but it is all directly and exactly on point concerning oppressive governments and arms confiscation

http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...s-registry-numbers-released-article-1.2267730

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-staging-a-massive-act-of-civil-disobedience/

Now just think about this for a minute.. just for shats and giggles .. lets say they came for us .. millions of us, tens of millions of us arguably 100 million of us .. where would they put us? how would they pay to hold us and feed us anywhere, guard us? how long do you think the trials would last or even get a court date ( I am assuming as an act of defiance nobody cops a plea, I mean if you are going to defy the law on the grounds of your rights, rolling over AFTER they catch you seems kind of dumb) ? What would happen to the economy if 50 or 60 million of us didn't show up for work ? In community property states would they arrest the spouse too? where would they put the kids ?

See this article for all the answers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Firearms_Registry I personally can relate to the mistakes on the forms.. I have arthritis in both hands and my penmanship has drastically declined over the years .. they always make the blocks too small on the form.

this is always going to be the weak point in any legislation .. it usually requires public co-operation and the logistics of enforcement in time, space, and cost are seldom addressed. This is why alcohol prohibition failed, this is why pot is being legalized , this is why prostitution has managed to continue to operate since before the invention of agriculture, and gambling, yeah that's illegal too .. uh huh


----------



## Meerkat (May 31, 2011)

:wave:


readytogo said:


> Since many here are mentioning Marshal Law, the Constitution and its Amendments our Basic Freedom Rights and everything else USA stands for I feel free to mention other things like 300 million people can`t be wrong about democracy or the fact that we have 12 million illegal's looking for a better life here and not in Mother Russia of wonton China or Cuba; I'm also one of those that escape looking for Freedom and cheese burgess with a nice cold coke; now a nice cold Bud. The resent events in Turkey proved that the people will rise up and defend their rights and freedom. In this country where many have die or defended and die in faraway lands in the name of democracy I sincerely doubt that we will allow tyranny or oppression to take place. My Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America and my oath of Enlistment are very close to my heart and mind, I cherish them like I cherish my family and I can assure anybody that as long as I`m breathing I will protect and defend my democracy and basic freedoms and not a puppet dictator or turncoat and I bet that all here feel the same to include our arm forces. So Hypothetically I don`t think about losing my rights or freedoms I only think about defending them and keep spreading the word about democracy to anybody that is willing to listen or bad mouth it.


 My favorite ex cuban and now All American. :wave: Wish all had this mentality.


----------



## Meerkat (May 31, 2011)

shawn_c2000 said:


> That was my first thought also but a couple of side thoughts to think about is (1. The easiest way to HELP the start of gun control is to stop ammo production yes people reload but what about when those supply's run dry. 2)also the military or Leo that does the confiscations has the advantages training, timing, and force by numbers.


 Plus NATO and many foreign troops controled by The UN already here. Germ warfare too.

We should all make sure our soul is in the right condition,just in case.


----------



## terri9630 (Jun 2, 2016)

readytogo said:


> Since many here are mentioning Marshal Law, the Constitution and its Amendments our Basic Freedom Rights and everything else USA stands for I feel free to mention other things like 300 million people can`t be wrong about democracy or the fact that we have 12 million illegal's looking for a better life here and not in Mother Russia of wonton China or Cuba; I'm also one of those that escape looking for Freedom and cheese burgess with a nice cold coke; now a nice cold Bud. The resent events in Turkey proved that the people will rise up and defend their rights and freedom. In this country where many have die or defended and die in faraway lands in the name of democracy I sincerely doubt that we will allow tyranny or oppression to take place. My Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America and my oath of Enlistment are very close to my heart and mind, I cherish them like I cherish my family and I can assure anybody that* as long as I`m breathing I will protect and defend my democracy* and basic freedoms and not a puppet dictator or turncoat and I bet that all here feel the same to include our arm forces. So Hypothetically I don`t think about losing my rights or freedoms I only think about defending them and keep spreading the word about democracy to anybody that is willing to listen or bad mouth it.


We are actually a democratic republic, not a true democracy but I strongly agree with your sentiment.


----------



## Meerkat (May 31, 2011)

AmmoSgt said:


> Let me throw some real world actual fact into the game here I know some will hate that there is several pages of reading involved but it is all directly and exactly on point concerning oppressive governments and arms confiscation
> 
> http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian
> 
> ...


 About 30 years ago I read a book titled ' Meim Kamp ' or Mien Kemp spelling?
Check it out and note the simularities of yesterdays germany and todays america. Promises of a brighter future, gun confications education indoctrinations ,sons and brothers arresting their own families. Same thing with the revolution far as obeying ptb.

Did you know that Patton, Eisenhower and MacArthur fired on their own vets in Washinton in 1932? Its called obeying orders, including illegal ones. Google ' The Bonas March' its also on youtube.


----------



## AmmoSgt (Apr 13, 2014)

Meerkat said:


> About 30 years ago I read a book titled ' Meim Kamp ' or Mien Kemp spelling?
> Check it out and note the simularities of yesterdays germany and todays america. Promises of a brighter future, gun confications education indoctrinations ,sons and brothers arresting their own families. Same thing with the revolution far as obeying ptb.
> 
> Did you know that Patton, Eisenhower and MacArthur fired on their own vets in Washinton in 1932? Its called obeying orders, including illegal ones. Google ' The Bonas March' its also on youtube.


Mein Kampf My struggle Adolph Hitler yeah know it and yep the Bonus Army want some of their promised pension pay early

here is something that might shock you http://www.weeklystandard.com/vanit...tlers-speeches-by-his-bedside/article/2001343 Not rumor .. came out in divorce proceedings and Trump did a weird admission non admission ..


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

*Not much*



BillS said:


> The constitution could be reinterpreted tomorrow. The Supreme Court could decide that the right to own guns does not exist.
> 
> Or the president could issue an executive order outlawing gun ownership.
> 
> Both are very real possibilities.


Not very likely in the foreseeable future now ! artydance:


----------



## Meerkat (May 31, 2011)

AmmoSgt said:


> Mein Kampf My struggle Adolph Hitler yeah know it and yep the Bonus Army want some of their promised pension pay early
> 
> here is something that might shock you http://www.weeklystandard.com/vanit...tlers-speeches-by-his-bedside/article/2001343 Not rumor .. came out in divorce proceedings and Trump did a weird admission non admission ..


 When I read Mein Kampf I couldn't understand how so many people could be so apathtic and cruel to ignore what a maniac this man was. Well history proves it is not only possible but likely that many worship leaders and are blind to their evils. I haven't voted in years,I did write in Tom Tancredo and Alan Keys several years ago. I think the only hope is for people to change not leadership.



BillM said:


> Not very likely in the foreseeable future now ! artydance:


 LOL, I agree.


----------



## 101airborne (Jan 29, 2010)

Don't know you well enough to answer that kind of question. Sorry! Plus I sure wouldn't post it on an open internet forum. BUT I will say IF I have any firearms, IF the JBT's came for them Guarentee they would never find them.


----------



## AmmoSgt (Apr 13, 2014)

BillS said:


> The constitution could be reinterpreted tomorrow. The Supreme Court could decide that the right to own guns does not exist.
> 
> Or the president could issue an executive order outlawing gun ownership.
> 
> Both are very real possibilities.


Actually no .. can't happen .. common misconception

And here is why.. First you need to read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, not the Constitution's preamble, The Bill of Rights has it's own Preamble.

http://www.billofrights.org/

Now keeping in mind what the preamble says . look at the Bill of Rights again, notice the wording, Congress shall make no law , shall not be infringed, no soldier, shall not be violated , No person ...

They are all in the negative .. as the preamble says, it's just a reminder and a clarification to point out nothing in the body of the Constitution confers any authority or power on the US Government to do anything to interfere with these Rights. All the Rights, every single little itsy bitsy one of them, belong to the people , including the Right to make and break government itself.

We the People ordained the Constitution. and we decided exactly what rights and power to delegate to the Government, no more no less . The US Constitution is the Rights we agreed to give up to empower a government, and only those Rights .. The Bill of Rights is merely a reminder and a clarification that the Government was never granted certain powers .. The Bill of Rights the 2nd Amendment could disappear tomorrow or could have never existed and the Government would still never have had those powers or authorities, because none of them are granted in the Constitution in the first place.

Except in one place the 5th Amendment reminds the government and we the people that the Government does have teeth and power , but only under certain narrow conditions .. it's all in the Constitution itself.

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

before a court with full due process the right to confront your accusers with a lawyer with all the rules of evidence they can, on an individual basis if the court so adjudicates take you guns or your life or any other right so long as the law you broke meets the tests of the appropriate level of scrutiny Heller says RKBA is an individual fundamental right like your right to life itself.

That means any law has to pass a certain test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny

To pass strict scrutiny, the law or policy must satisfy three tests:
1) It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of a large number of individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections. and not violating explicit constitutional protections. and not violating explicit constitutional protections. and not violating explicit constitutional protections. And that my Friends is why we have the Bill of Rights, an explicit list of Constitutional Protections.

2) The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If the government action encompasses too much (overbroad) or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest, then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored.

3) The law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest: there must not be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest. The test will be met even if there is another method that is equally the least restrictive. Some legal scholars consider this "least restrictive means" requirement part of being narrowly tailored, but the Court generally evaluates it separately.

case closed


----------



## AmmoSgt (Apr 13, 2014)

AdmiralD7S said:


> ...except for the small problem that what you say is theoretical. If everyone follows the constitution and bill of rights, then, sure, I agree with everything you said. But if someone in authority decides otherwise, then it's not "case closed" by any means. Our founding documents are only pieces of paper...it takes PEOPLE to uphold the ideas written on them.


Well yeah.. DUH! folks aren't supposed to kick back and suck it up.

I mean geeze at least drop by your representatives office local state national and share you thoughts and concerns .. write letters is good but a personal visit even if the rep him/herself isn't there they have staff that are supposed to listen .. I never understood why so few folks actually went to their local office .. you want to adjust some attitudes .. try a steady stream of individuals and small groups making a habit of keeping office staff busy and scheduling meetings for when the public servant is in town.. I've had some truly interesting and even productive heart to hearts with both staff and the rep proper over the years ... they aren't used to everyday joe and jane showing up .. business people moneyed interest yeah.. and usually money stuff everything from zoning to regulation .. but there is no law that saws it can't be Rights or policy or whatever floats your boat..

There are some "rules" or better said manners or protocols know what the heck you are talking about.. use note cards if you have to be polite and respectful and don't be afraid to point out if they seem to be blowing you off or just trying to placate you.. come back wit a small group that makes the space in the office seem full but not crowded to the point they everybody can't comfortably participate .. even if it is just to say the occasion yes or no or right on or that point is important to me regardless of who makes it if you can't get agreement or support write down the whys come up with arguments on those point and go back when you can make you case , be politely relentless and don't be afraid to not use the canned talking points and bring up your heartfelt personal concerns and take on the issue. make it personal to your life.. I've seen local reps totally felled and defeated that were completely immune to every possible talking point by one little old lady or kid in a scout uniform making one uniquely personal point a mother with a personal take on an issue .. If they don't have refreshments bring donuts and coffee get to know them keep it friendly but don't compromise on principle and understand policy is usually a compromise .. take a quarter of the pie when you can get and considering how much I like pie.. once I get that quarter nailed down, I go back for more... with friends and knowing them I get the coffee orders right.. pie just goes with coffee

helps to know what's important to the rep.. might be something that you agree with and that they need help on but make that the closing point regardless if you make progress on your agenda .. especially if you don't .. never quid pro quo never never never try to buy support but build a bridge on the issues you can so it doesn't become totally adversarial .. you may totally not get what you want on this immediate issue, it happens, but you want to keep that door open on other issues even if they aren't issues now.

in other words be polite, professional, and principled.

being picky on individual parts of an issue is perfectly okay I like this proposed bill/regulation/ policy except this part , or what If somebody took advantage of this, or wouldn't this hurt folks trying to do that , could we clarify that. All fair game

don't start off by calling the A**holes, A**holes.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

AmmoSgt said:


> Actually no .. can't happen .. common misconception


Yes it can happen and it has. Look at the knee jerk laws passed after 9/11. The so called Patriot Act did away with several 'rights'.


----------

