Do you think all these gun nuts making threats will lead to a national Ruby Ridge situation?

[SummerSnow]

[JaneyVee]

1. Yes.

[B2G]

2. And who was responsible for THAT travesty??

[maxsolomon]

7. I'd say the folks at Ruby Ridge who holed up and forced the confrontation.

Just like David Koresh and his lieutenants at Waco forced a confrontation.

Millenarian paranoia.

When you see the histrionics already emerging over any impending (and likely laughable) "Gun Control" measures as being equivalent to Stalinism, why, it's almost as if it's a self-fufilling prophecy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

87. You might want to review the history on this incident

The Wikipedia article is a pretty good place to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge and there is also some good stuff on the associated talk page.

Today Ruby Ridge is taught in law enforcement as a chain of major fuckups that they never want to repeat individually or severally. The Feds internally and externally have admitted they screwed up. They settled for $3.1 to the Weaver family, and $380K to Harris, who actually killed the Marshal (Degan). The FBI director (Louis Freeh) disciplined 12 agents and summed it up as "synonymous with the exaggerated application of federal law enforcement" and stated "law enforcement overreacted at Ruby Ridge." It really was that bad.

Just because the Federal Marshals and FBI screwed up badly does not make Weaver was a good guy. Not in the least and I am not defending him.

[maxsolomon]

183. I know the history. I watched it happen on TV.

Just like I watched Waco unfold and predicted the outcome.

Yes, the ATF are fuckups. Too bad we didn't eliminate them like Al Gore proposed.

But the Weavers wanted the apocalypse to come, too.

That Wiki looks like it is in an editing war by Weaver apologists. It is not unbiased.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

204. If you watched it on TV you did not get 20% of the story

The two Gov reports are dry but good reading.

[Recursion]

14. Poppy Bush. And a typo in a court appearance date

Honestly, I doubt I would have much faith in the fairness of the system if I were given a document telling me to go to court a month after the actual court date and then had a bench warrant issued on me.

[Hoyt]

20. Feds gave Weaver a bunch of time to walk out of his compound unarmed.

Instead weaver hid behind his wife, baby and armed 14 year old son. He should have surrendered and faced the charges.

[Recursion]

25. No, the first contact was when they shot his son

They didn't even tell him they were on his property before that.

[Hoyt]

29. They sat outside his compound for days. Then, sonny boy

and his buddy shot a federal Marshall. Get your facts straight. Daddy was a gun running racist who should have protected his family by giving up when he had chance. Instead, he put his family - who were racist pigs too - in harms way.

[Recursion]

34. NM. I'm not going to re-hash that fiasco

I just think everybody involved did exactly the wrong thing.

Weaver was found not guilty of everything except failure to appear, and got a million dollars from the government.

[Hoyt]

36. At least the feds meant right. Weaver was a vile person, and criminal.

[sir pball]

179. And Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi

Was a standup law enforcement officer doing the right thing, I assume.

Randy Weaver wasn't a particularly nice guy by any means but that shouldn't legitimize that shitshow to any person with any concept of modern criminal justice.

[Hoyt]

187. I'm sure these guys will agree with you.

[sir pball]

193. So you think it was reasonable and justifiable

For a sniper to shoot an unarmed woman, holding a baby, in the throat?

It's not like he wasn't looking through a friggin' riflescope. The only reason he isn't rotting in prison is because the .gov stepped in and covered his ass - and still paid $3.1mil for "wrongful death". Why can't you accept that the Federal handling of the situation was a colossal fucked-up overreaction even if Randy Weaver was a pretty unpleasant fellow? Let me rephrase that, I just want a simple yes or no answer - should due process apply to people you don't like?

Frankly, with your clearly vicious, violent, extrajudicial opinions on how to deal with "these guys" (whom I'd have less than nothing to do with, FWIW) I'm quite glad you have such a distaste for firearms. I can't imagine what you'd do with one.

[Hoyt]

198. I think it was a bad choice for the racist gun runner to hide behind his wife and kids, and to send

his 14 year old out to murder a Federal Marshal. Sorry, I can't get all teary over the worthless piece of scum.

[sir pball]

199. It was definitely poor judgement

In light of the fact (determined a posteriori by several courts, the Senate, and both internal and external FBI investigations) that the only crime Weaver committed was failure to appear. Your assertion of murder is factually incorrect as well; a jury found Harris was justified in killing a Federal agent in self-defense which is one hell of a bar to jump.

In its own reports, the gov't called the situation an "overreaction by law enforcement" and labelled the rules of engagement (basically "shoot on sight&quot as outright unconstitutional, and rolled out major changes across all departments to fix the issue.

Again, yes or no - should a racist, separatist, gun loving right-wing asshole be subject to an unconstitutional, violent overreaction by the Federal government with no repercussions? I find everything Weaver stands for utterly reprehensible...but even a goddamn werewolf is entitled to Fifth Amendment protections.

[TheMadMonk]

206. There were repurcussions, quite serious ones?

So your question is irrelevant.

And no matter how you cut it the undelying situation remained: A paranoiac waving guns in the air and declaring he'd shoot anyone who came onto his property.

I am sure, much of the lead up was down to some petty little fuck in department SAO, doing his own thing in order to score points off departments ATF, FBI & USMS, followed by a big dose of no-one's backing down, once the armed separatist started playing bunker games with government agents.

All else being equal, Weaver was given any number of opportunities to fall back on his fifth ammendment rights and protections, but he'd already decided in his own mind that his rights had been taken away and he acted as if he had nothing to lose. (Except of course wife and son as it turned out.)

And the ultimate irony, when push came to shove in the aftermath: HE WAS AWARDED EVERY SINGLE CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL PROTECTION DUE HIM.

Too bad his wife and kid weren't there to share in the fruits of his "Constitutional stand"

[ProgressiveProfessor]

63. Which is why the Feds paid them damages...

Don't try an rewrite history. Even the Feds acknowledge it was a first class fuck up on their part. Not defending Weaver, but the facts are not on your side.

[Hoyt]

70. Yes, you are defending weaver. Gerry Spence got the payment for the racist pig.

Sorry, weaver's actions are responsible for outcome.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

80. What total bullshit...you are playing fast and loose with the facts again.

Feds teach Ruby Ridge as a never do this again. Several sequential major fuck ups that they have learned from. It is a serious lessons learned. Even the released and redacted report should scare the shit out of you.

The family got $3.1M out of concern that a judgement would be much higher. The Federal Marshals and FBI actively opposed the settlement.

Not one word have I posted that supports or defends Weaver.

PPOSTFU

[Hoyt]

89. If weaver had not sold illegal guns to ayran nation, nothing would have happened.

It's that simple. Oh, he could have told his son and friend not to shoot a federal Marshal. But, I guess in some circles that is OK.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

95. Don't forget the false accusation by his neighbors...

The "Incident at the Y" was not clear cut in the least. Have you read the multiple accounts? Are you aware that the physical evidence collected by the FBI directly contradicts the story of the other Marshals? Have you even skimmed the two reports, redacted as they are?

It was a fucking mess. Weaver was a racist pig, the Marshals were buffoons, who at best got very confused in the first encounter and at worst lied to save their asses. FBI comms and ROE were a mess. No heroes or good guys anywhere to be found.

[Hoyt]

100. Marshals would not have been there except for weaver's love of guns and hatred of minorities.

Weaver's fault. And you are right, we've learned something about dealing with such scum.

[galileoreloaded]

117. You are my new DU favorite.

If I could bottle you up and sell you I would! Keep it coming!

[friendly_iconoclast]

121. Bullshit. He has never defended Weaver.

[Hoyt]

158. You better check your facts (and guns) if you don't know that. Google if you must.

[friendly_iconoclast]

184. You made the claim, it's up to *you* to document it- and you haven't.

[Hoyt]

186. Seriously, you have no business near a gun.

"Weaver was charged with multiple crimes relating to the Ruby Ridge incident, a total of ten counts including the original firearms charges and murder. Attorney Gerry Spence handled Weaver's defense . . . . . ." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Weaver

I would provide other citations, however most are from the type websites that bigots and the gun culture hang out. But, you can look it up anywhere the scumbag weaver is discussed.


I'll accept your apology when you are ready.

[friendly_iconoclast]

190. I was referring to *your* slur of ProgressiveProfessor, here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2170659

Response to Hoyt (Reply #29)
Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:24 PM

ProgressiveProfessor (20,249 posts)
63. Which is why the Feds paid them damages...

Don't try an rewrite history. Even the Feds acknowledge it was a first class fuck up on their part. Not defending Weaver, but the facts are not on your side.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2170691

Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #63)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:28 PM

Star Member Hoyt (10,460 posts)
70. Yes, you are defending weaver. Gerry Spence got the payment for the racist pig.

You have not only libelled another DUer, you're a hypocrite:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117249755#post15

Star Member Hoyt (10,464 posts)
15. When you quote something like that, it is customary to give a link to the source.

[Hoyt]

192. Well if the self-proclaimed "Professor" is not defending weaver, I'd like to know what he is doing.

"Don't try to re-write history" [of a racist bigot who sold illegal guns to the ayran nation and worse] is damn sure defending him and those like his sorry ass.

You guys are amazing. No wonder you can't interpret the 2nd Amendment.

[friendly_iconoclast]

194. Have you never heard the phrase "A pox on both your houses", Hoyt?

Try as you might, you can't make history binary.

The Weavers were undoubtedly nasty pieces of work, but their faults did not transform the Feds
into blameless knights in shining armor.

Likewise, opposing the Iraq War wasn't an automatic character reference for Saddam Hussein & family,
however hard the neocons might have pushed that meme...

[Hoyt]

197. Poor little randy would never have encountered feds if he did not frequent ayran nation meetings,

sell illegal guns to the friggin racists to use against innocent people, live in a compound surrounded by guns and the little racists he raised, and probably worse.

Sorry, I won't shed a tear for poor little randy who paid the price for his vile life choices. You can martyr him if you like.

[beevul]

200. The "compound" shit again?

You're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts, hoyt.

That cabin can not by any honest definition, be described as a "compound".

[SomethingFishy]

209. Really? So if I say I don't support torture that means

I'm supporting terrorists?

It is possible to find fault with both sides. It's childish and dare I say.. Republican to claim that it's one way or the other. It's not. You can say Weaver was scum and the ATF overreacted without one idea overriding the other.

[Hoyt]

211. There is not much worse than a racist who helps ayran nation., and teaches his family racist crap.

Sorry. Government agents sat outside for days waiting for weaver to walk out unarmed. Instead, he choose to hide behind his family and one of them murdered an agent.

There is no middle ground.

[krispos42]

148. Do you support the militarization of the police?

Do you support no-knock, early-morning SWAT raids as routine and common police procedure?

[Hoyt]

150. Nope. Nor do I think all your guns help.

[krispos42]

151. Yet you are arguing for a harsh and immediate police arrest.

You are giving the police complete immunity for any and all actions they take, legal or illegal, and transferring all of the blame to the person (innocent until proven guilty, remember) they are trying to arrest.


Were you cheering for OWS or the NYPD 14 months ago?

[Hoyt]

159. Who is? Show me where I did that. Now, if you guys want to play randy weaver and not comply

with any newly enacted laws. . . . . ..

Such paranoia and guns do not mix well in our society.

[TheMadMonk]

207. The quicker the arrest, the lower the liklihood,...

...that some barred up "superhero" ON EITHER SIDE will screw the pooch and touch off a firefight.

THIS, is why most of the OWS arestees were arrested in a sitting position. Why most protest arestees are taken sitting, or in some other passive stance.

Take it as a given that, cops will inevitably overreact in tense situations, because they'd far rather attend a disciplinary hearing than be guest of honour at a funeral. The arseholes just waiting for an excuse are a minority. Most just want to be certain that they go home to wife and kids at the end of their shift.

The ONLY place to fight an illegitimate arrest is the courts. It does not matter how correct you KNOW you are and how wrong you KNOW the cop is. IF you resist with violence or the threat thereof, you'll eat gravel if you're lucky and lead if not.

Of course the police don't deserve a free pass, but if you offer them violence, you've almost certainly muddied the waters enough to effectively give them one.

[H2O Man]

178. Respectfully disagree.

He is not "defending weaver (sic)" .....

If our nation is to function under the rule of law, two things are essential to maintain a civil society. First, those who violate the law have to be held accountable. Second, the law has to be applied in a manner that does not violate constitutional rights.

The person you are accusing of defending Weaver is merely pointing out that a significant part of the tragic events were a result of the police's failures to carry out that second part.

The true value of the rule of law isn't found in respecting the rights of those we find attractive and/or agreeable. Quite the opposite. A good example being that Amendment 1 applies equally to good and decent human beings, and to those who channel Fox News.

That Weaver was trash .... a repulsive low-life ..... is a given on DU:GD. That law enforcement made serious errors in that confrontation has been established and documented by a wide variety of sources, including the outcomes of the civil court cases.

[friendly_iconoclast]

185. "When you quote something like that, it is customary to give a link to the source."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117249755#post15

Where are the links to your sources, Hoyt?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

59. The Feds

It is taught today as a classic example of what not to do like the Eula Love shooting and others.

[Zoeisright]

67. The assholes who shot at Federal Marshals.

Next?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

88. You might want to read up on that a bit more

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge would be a good place to start.

Ruby Ridge is taught in law enforcement as a chain of major fuckups that they never want to repeat individually or severally. The Feds internally and externally have admitted they screwed up. They settled for $3.1 to the Weaver family, and $380K to Harris, who actually killed the Marshal (Degan). The FBI director (Louis Freeh) disciplined 12 agents and summed it up as "synonymous with the exaggerated application of federal law enforcement" and stated "law enforcement overreacted at Ruby Ridge." It really was that bad.

Just because the Federal Marshals and FBI screwed up badly does not make Weaver a good guy. Not in the least.

[Old and In the Way]

105. Who wrote that Wiki article?

Please, at least use a source that's not subject to bias on the events of Ruby Ridge. Most sane Americans understand that an extremist on guns was willing to sacrifice his kid to get the confrontation with the government that he really wanted....are you saying that this guy Weaver was not a domestic terrorist?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

113. Its not binary situation. Weaver was scum AND the Feds fucked up horribly

If you have read any of the government reports or others of the incident, its pretty clear there were no good guys in it at all. Most Americans seem to understand that, though fewer know that damages were paid to Harris (who killed the marshal) and the Weaver family.

The Wiki article matches up well with the bulk of the reports and exonerates no one. Authorship and editing citations are on the backup pages, look for the tabs at the top.

[friendly_iconoclast]

131. Your explanation is too nuanced for those of a Manichaean persuasion.

They prefer a cartoonish view of politics...

[Lizzie Poppet]

91. Assholes, to be sure...

...but they shot BACK at Federal Marshals. As anyone adequately familiar with the case knows...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

102. Harris, who shot the federal marshal who died was not only acquitted on the basis of self defense

he received a $380K settlement from the Feds.

It was an unholy fuck up all around

[Lizzie Poppet]

104. Yes...yes...and yes.

I'm quite familiar with the facts of the incident, too. For all that I despise racist imbeciles like weaver, the Bush41 government's behavior in that case was despicable. There were no heroes at Ruby Ridge...

[seabeyond]

168. the criminals... nt

[onehandle]

3. Many. As the white male wanes, they will burn out violently. nt

[vaberella]

78. Now that is a profound statement. n/t

[jody]

4. Probably not but are you prepared to volunteer to take them out? nt

[LanternWaste]

13. I'd get frustrated and ask irrelevant, petulant questions too...

I'd get frustrated and ask irrelevant, petulant questions too if my Sacred Cow was being slowly basted for a long roast.

[Hoyt]

15. That's what the feds are for, although I'm sure some of Gungeoneers would scream.

When racists run guns to groups like ayran nation and hole up in "milita compounds," society should demand action.

[Lizzie Poppet]

93. To which "feds" are you referring?

You do realize that if there's some sort of federal-level attempt to enact and actually enforce sweeping bans on civilian possession of firearms, the only "federal" force remotely capable of said enforcement would be the military. The US military leans rather markedly to the right these days. If you think orders like that would be generally obeyed, you're living in a dream world.

[Hoyt]

94. Actually lots in military are not racist right wingers. The RWers are easy to spot too.

[Lizzie Poppet]

98. The race card? I accept your surrender.

Priceless...

[Hoyt]

106. You are one claimed military is right wing. Had enough of the gungeon junk tonight.

Enjoy your guns.

[onehandle]

33. They don't have a chance...

[jody]

39. Looks dangerous. How do you plan to get around the Posse Comitatus Act? nt

[onehandle]

40. That's pre-12/14 thinking.

Everything is on the table now to corral the McVeigh crowd.

[Taitertots]

58. Are you seriously suggesting that the US military should bomb American cities...

To enforce gun laws?

[Warren Stupidity]

66. Uh no, the suggestion is that if you enter a state of armed insurrection

You will be in a confrontation with the military.

See for example the civil war.

[Taitertots]

81. Ruby Ridge wasn't an armed insurrection

Why did you make the jump from "a national ruby ridge" to armed insurrection against the US government?

The military is obligated to defend the state against armed insurrection, but refusal to follow gun laws is miles away from being armed insurrection.

[Lizzie Poppet]

99. Any situation of legitimate, widespread insurrection...

...will include the military, with elements thereof on either side. Just look at most any reasonably contemporary civil war (including our own).

[TheKentuckian]

139. The military is not population control. Really, neither are the police.

Governance is by popular sufferance in this country. The military can wipe out the population, they have little to no hope nor more importantly the will to occupy this country.

Once it becomes about boots on the ground and it must to occupy, all the planes, and tanks, and drones are much more limited in practical use. Particularly, in your own country.

Order is maintained because almost everybody is keeping the peace not the threat of martial might against people defenseless against men with guns.

[cherokeeprogressive]

83. The masturbatory fantasy where the American Military kills Americans is reaching a fever pitch.

The anti-gun paranoia is driving some people right over the edge.

It's almost time for the tissues.

[Taitertots]

90. I wouldn't go that far, but some people would get schadenfreude from seeing their ideological...

opponents killed by the American military.

Some people are irrationally terrified that their friends and neighbors own non-military firearms. Their defense mechanism to this terror is thinking that the American military will protect them from their friends and neighbors.

[Lizzie Poppet]

101. All gleefully postulated by people who never served a day in their life.

Pure comedy gold...

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Since you asked

1.- Guard...a governor can authorize a guard unit to fly 'em.

2.- You do know DHS has air assets as well, insert alphabet soup here.

[friendly_iconoclast]

120. On what date will Victory in Afghanistan Day be celebrated?

[snooper2]

165. I will if it's on a weekend, is the pay good?

[jody]

167. Pay rotten, governors and president will call up the unorganized militia. That's all males 17-45. nt

[snooper2]

169. but we are getting paid right? and I don't have a gun right now...

Well, a busted up 22 that is broke in half LOL...

They'll have to provide weapon and white castles

[Hatchling]

188. Omg!

weapon and white castles

The new beer and travel money!

[NutmegYankee]

5. In some cases it may.

And it would likely be messy and difficult to handle as it was in that case. Sure, we have drones but we aren't going to drop bombs on homes. Especially not in neighborhoods.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

42. You don't know about MOVE in Philadelphia, do you?

May 13, 1985, a helicopter dropped a bomb on the MOVE headquarters to stop an armed standoff. Eleven people died, 65 homes burned (the entire block caught on fire).

Or the Tulsa Race Riot? May 31-June 1, 1921.

Six biplanes flown by whites dropped incendiary bombs on the black business district of Tulsa and also fired rifles at the blacks. 800 people admitted to hospitals injured, estimated 300 people killed, many shot on the streets. Six thousand people arrested and detained; white rioters shooting and killing blacks indiscrimately on the streets.

[Mojorabbit]

62. I remember. I was young then and never regained my trust in govt.

You learn what America is all about in school while at the same time on the tv stuff is happening that is not what you were
taught we were all about.

[Old and In the Way]

107. Congrats!

You must be the oldest poster on DU! You must be, what, 100+? Amazing what you can remember.

On edit, OK, it was probably the Philly attack on extremists that you remember. Not America's best day, but if you are promoting armed insurrection, you shouldn't be surprised when the government takes action. Sorry that they hid behind young children who were the real victims in this tragedy.

[Mojorabbit]

109. I was

almost 30 in 1985.

[NutmegYankee]

116. I didn't.

Obviously that didn't go well.

[Fresh_Start]

6. No, I don't

they are cowards at the heart.

[bluestate10]

8. No. The great majority of them are cowards. nt

[jody]

10. Absolutely, particularly those wearing medals earned in combat. Have you volunteered already to help

take those cowards out?

[Hoyt]

18. Your support of armed up racists milita types is duly noted, and expected.

[friendly_iconoclast]

122. Will *you* be joining up to fight the "armed up racists milita types" ?

Or will yours be more of a Cheney/Romney war- via lip service only?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

19. If the government wants you dead, you're dead

You may wish to internalize that before engaging in too many more auto-stimulating fantasies about holing up in Idaho somewhere. Pink fucking spray.

[jody]

21. DisgustipatedinCA have you volunteered? nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

26. I volunteered for military service

But no, I haven't volunteered to conduct any extrajudicial executions. Why on earth are you possessed to ask such an inane question?

[jody]

30. Not inane question at all. My posts are all to #8. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

114. Did you notice the killings in Paris?

By guess it is much the same, not sure which government

[DisgustipatedinCA]

115. In 1789? Yes, I took note. Why?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

118. The ones yesterday...3 Kurdish women who were activists.

Three Kurdish activists, including reportedly one of the founding members of a militant separatist group, were shot dead in what authorities called an "execution" in central Paris. The slayings prompted speculation that the long-running conflict between insurgents from the minority group and Turkey was playing out on French shores.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/french-police-say-3-kurdish-women-shot-dead-at-paris-office-of-pro-kurd-organization/2013/01/10/8df3b9ca-5b0b-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_story.html

Erdogan is going to have a helluva time proving it wasn't on his orders.

[LanternWaste]

22. Which veterans wearing medals earned in combat do you believe will be making violent threats?

Which veterans wearing medals earned in combat do you believe will be making violent threats? Or do you simply believe that all combat vets wearing medals will be doing this?

[jody]

23. LanternWaste have you volunteered? nt

[LanternWaste]

24. Have you answered the question?

Have you answered the question?

[jody]

27. I'll put you down as a non-volunteer. If you're male, 17-45 you're part of the militia anyway.

[bluestate10]

72. I registered for and stood in the draft during the last years of the Vietnam conflict. I lost a

brother to war. Don't question my bravery ever again.

[jody]

76. LOL people who are really brave don't call others cowards. Probably a clerk in basic. nt

[GeorgeGist]

84. Seriously fuckedup thinking.

[bluestate10]

85. Look. Whenever I should have been a coward, I haven't been. I am not a superman, I

just thought quickly through every life threatening situation that I have faced. Would I be fearful if I was in a theater and someone was shooting it up? I probably would be. Being afraid at the start of a life threatening situation isn't the same thing as being a coward.

I can tell you of situations in my life where I have shown bravery when most other people wouldn't have, but you are determined to be cynical, so sharing that information would be wasted on you.

[Old and In the Way]

110. Just so I understand....

A person who serves in the military, maybe gets medals for killing people....they are untouchable when they come back home and decide to overthrow the the USG and the Constitution? Because, they served, they get a free pass on their domestic actions, even if that's the ultimate destruction of our society? Is that your point?

[Hoyt]

9. Would not doubt it. Some of the Gungeoneers are big randy weaver apologists.

[Recursion]

16. Randy Weaver was a racist scumbag

who was treated criminally by the BFEE-backed law enforcement agencies of the day. I don't know anybody in that situation I can say was the good guy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

97. A good summary

[Fumesucker]

11. Some few will almost certainly do some stupid shit, stochastic terrorism you know..

Most aren't that nuts but a lot of the louder mouthed ones are very careless and casual with firearms.

They'll make a lot of noise, there will be some incidents from time to time and there will be quite a few accidents and probably some inter group killing too.

[friendly_iconoclast]

123. It's the non-loudmouths that will be a greater problem.

A disciplined group with sympathizers needn't be very large at all- consider Germany's Red Army Faction, or
Greece's

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Organization_17_November

Neither group ever had more than a couple dozen members, and the Provisional IRA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army

were about 10,000 in total, yet managed to keep the British government tied up in fits for years

[Recursion]

12. A few, maybe. Hopefully the FBI and ATF have learned since then (nt)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

65. Its taught as a example of what never to do again

[LongTomH]

17. Sporadic, isolated incidents of violence are almost a certainty.

A "national Ruby Ridge situation" is possible; but not certain.

[WinkyDink]

28. It could. Plenty of "militiamen" in my state of PA.

[Recursion]

37. Largely *because of* Ruby Ridge

That was what made the whole militia shit show take off.

[doc03]

31. Could be but did you ever see the guys that are in these so called Militias

a bunch of middle aged morons with big fat guts. I don't think they would last long.

[Hoyt]

38. Problem is, they'll just commit hate crimes against innocent people.

They are potential terrorists, plain and simple.

[SQUEE]

44. for once, you and I agree..

only thing is I am prepared to defend myself with more than a can of beans.

[Hoyt]

47. That's why we need to get tough on guns now.

We don't need to be shooting each other in streets.

I knew we had "met" under another name.

[SQUEE]

51. hardly I am the same as I ever was.

There is no putting the genie back in the bottle, we are careening to a crisis, and until people back off the dehumanizing of political parties it's just going to accelerate.

[Hoyt]

64. Yeah, arming up to shoot fellow citizens isn't "dehumanizing."

Time to start getting real about arming up, before a lot of innocent people get hurt.

[friendly_iconoclast]

130. Unless it's the Feds doing the shooting, amirite?

[Frank Cannon]

135. That is an unfair, inaccurate description.

They are a bunch of middle aged morons with big fat guts who run around in the woods shooting high-powered weaponry at stuff that can't shoot back.

[stultusporcos]

35. The only response by the government to the gun guts and militiapersons who screech

“Nonsense, nonsense..out of my cold dead hands”

Gov response “Challenge accepted” then they are taken out by any means necessarywith extreme prejudice.

[Glassunion]

43. Wow! Just.... Wow!

[SQUEE]

46. So, are you hawk on any one besides your fellow citizens?

too many people here are preparing to rejoice the slaughter of a significant number of your fellow man...
I wager most have never seen combat and know not of which they speak.

[Old and In the Way]

112. As per the the 2nd Amendment...the gun humpers ought to parade on the Commons

and not be surprised when their Bushmasters are trumped by our 600BB/year military. The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect us from outside enemies...not to allow gun nuts to kill thousands of Americans every year without consequence.

[stultusporcos]

156. You would LOSE your bet

These clowns, the nutters and militiaperson who spew these threats, are threating the safety and security of the nation and everyone else who does not hold such extreme views on guns.

[SQUEE]

162. Really? I used the word most.. you, me and a few others may be vets..

But as is the case with most chicken hawks... Those that cry the most for war, have never seen it.
I fall back on a quote I use often in these discussions, but I feel can never be said too much.

"It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded
who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation."
William T. Sherman

[stultusporcos]

202. War is a terriable thing and is something I would not look forward to seeing again

what I did had nothing to do with keeping the country free. Tough life lesson to learn.

But I would have no problem rooting out those that have a desire to rise up with arms in this country and I would gladly do it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

124. You gonna be volunteering for the job?

[Recursion]

41. Randy Weaver is still alive, and is a million dollars richer thanks to his lawsuit

Just something to think about.

[kestrel91316]

48. He probably went and spent that million bucks on guns. Hope he's enjoying them.

Hope he winds up old, and poor, and alone, with nothing and no one but his guns for company.

[Recursion]

52. Well, the US Marshalls saw to that, I guess (nt)

[Bay Boy]

71. That's your wish for him?

How about something like "I hope he finds the errors of his ways and reaches out to people and teaches them to love all people"?

[kestrel91316]

201. No. Sorry. People like him NEVER learn. He will be filled with hate until the day

he drops dead of a heart attack or stroke caused by all his evil thoughts.

SO MOTE IT BE.

[Hoyt]

50. I don't see weaver as some one to aspire, no matter how much he scammed from society.

[Recursion]

53. Like I said, he's a racist scumbag

Who was treated unconscionably by the Bush crime cartel

[Hoyt]

60. You won't get me to cry for poor old randy, Zimmerman, cowboys, or milita types.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

82. Actually it was 100K to him and $1M each to his children, $3.1 in total

[cleanhippie]

45. Do you think all thes gun grabbers spewing hysterical nonsense will lead to gun law reform?

[backscatter712]

49. I'm surprised we haven't had something like that happen already.

Back in the Clinton era, there was Ruby Ridge, there was Waco, several other incidents from militias and right-wing radical groups. And then there was the Oklahoma City bombing...

[Demo_Chris]

73. Critical difference: at that time the BATF was out of control

Last edited Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:33 PM - Edit history (1)

Or, rather, they were until the OKC bombing caused both sides to wake the hell up.

Not directed at you, but I really wish the people on both sides of this issue would turn the rhetoric down to somewhere below "batshit crazy." Whether you are daydreaming of Second Amendment Patriots fighting off the forces of the New World Order, or fantasizing about Helicopter gunships and Marines mowing down gunowners, either way you are fucking nuts.

EDIT: my initial title was misleading.

[amandabeech]

154. Thank you for your post.

People are just going nuts.

Eventually, something really bad will happen if people on both sides don't take a deep breath.

[Mr.Bill]

77. Bill Clinton was not president when Ruby Ridge happened.

George H.W. Bush was.

[RKP5637]

54. Good chance of it IMO. n/t

[liberal N proud]

55. Such an incident would only hurt their case.

[DonCoquixote]

56. Yes, and

Part of the issue is that the right wing very much wants to keep conditions ripe for such events, as even the Branch Davidians are still revered as martyrs.

As Pope said it best "when treason doth prosper, none dare call it treason", and our oligarchs are doing JUST THAT, encouraging criminals.

[randr]

57. And would this situation kill 11,000 this year?

[Demo_Chris]

61. It very easily might

[larkrake]

68. Declare extremists US terrorists and covertly take them into custody

Anyone willing to state war against the "gummint" gives up his rights as citizens.

[Glassunion]

125. Define extremeist.

Careful when you open that can of worms. We may not be so lucky on who is our next president.

[TheKentuckian]

137. I think your understanding of the law is a bit off.

I think the kind of "law" you favor is disgusting.

What kind of disturbed person calls for "disappearing" people?

[quaker bill]

74. At some point, the way it is going, some people will do something stupid

The tactical response will be very ugly and likely very brief. There is a sufficiently large mass of people who are not well balanced and believe they have effective weapons and combat skills. If things keep up, some small group of them somewhere will manage to find out just how wrong they are about this.

The interesting bit will be what that does to promote just the very gun controls they oppose.

These folks out there should, but I think really don't understand just how seriously these guys with the high and tight hair cuts, very shiny shoes, and earwigs take their jobs. I have worked around a few and they are really not to be messed with.

[friendly_iconoclast]

129. The British Army thought their deployment to Northern Ireland in 1969 would be a temporary one.

They were still there 20 years later.

History is chock-full of the idea that armed conflicts would be "over in a month or two/by Christmas".

This was not only popular, it was almost always wrong. I would also remind you that some of those willing to
take on the Feds really do have combat skills, and a support base. The groups I cited in post #123
were never a majority and in fact were quite small- but they operated for decades...

[quaker bill]

157. Poor examples

You are probably correct that a very small group with extreme dedication, considerable skill, and absolute discipline might survive for a time and do significant damage. Such a group might be a threat to the general population, but would be no threat to the government, and would probably make government more popular.

The IRA is a poor example as out of kind as they were carrying forward ethnic and religious strife with long standing in an era where the intelligence tools available to law enforcement were comparatively weak. The german example also was of a very different era.

My prediction does not consider a paralell group arising here as a serious possibility. These are guys who apparently like to rant on the internet and think they are going to overthrow the government. Waco Texas comes more to mind, except that the government is unlikely to provide sufficient notice or engage in enough delay to allow CNN to set up a mobile newsroom. The coverage will be almost all after action.

To the extent such a movement attempts to form, it will be nipped in the bud, with prejudice. That is my prediction.

[friendly_iconoclast]

205. Aaah, but *which* government would be popular? State or Federal?

Last edited Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:55 AM - Edit history (1)

Some people are already making noises about not cooperating with the Feds in re gun control:

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10022175111

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172102064

WYOMING: State Legislator Files Bill to Block Feds on Gun Control


NOTE: I dont think that threatening to arrest Federal agents is a good idea, at all,I cite the above
as an example of potential widespread non-cooperation above the individual level.

[quaker bill]

208. We have been there and done that

If you recall integration of the schools. State nullification is a non-starter that will not last a week, if it even ever becomes law.

The business community simply will not tolerate such instability. I truly welcome the republicans to give it a try. They will be out of money and power so fast their collective heads will spin.

The business community wants tax breaks and a predictable and orderly flow of commerce to send money in their direction. The moment guns and ammo become even a modest threat to the stable flow of business, they will come off the shelves. You won't even need the feds to do it. The only people carrying such merchandise will quickly become the folks who carry little or nothing else, and for those few, life will become very complicated fast.

[ancianita]

75. Hell no. Threats are all they're good for.

First, gun owners don't even know who is on their side, so they attack everyone with "all or nothing" slippery slope fear about gun USE regulation. Second, they don't know who secures or endangers their freedoms. Any fellow American who's with a different view is a threat to them. Most of them still think that China is running this country and its debt. Third, gun owners just collect guns, shoot defenseless animals, targets, women and children. Gun owners have no good answer for the 5,096 children dead from guns in the last two years. Finally, gun owners don't protect anybody. Period. Their "feeling" of safety correlates with their insecurity.

This Ruby Ridge image and various media outrage are typical teenage histrionics. Nothing's going to happen in any organized way.

e: cleanup

[haikugal]

108. +++++++

[Glassunion]

126. Define your idea of "gun owner"; is this simply anyone who owns a gun?

Or do you mean "gun extremists, nut jobs, absolutists, etc..."?

[ancianita]

132. I don't mean all gun owners, but the OP doesn't define "gun nuts making threats," either. There is

a gray area. Having grown up in gun culture and owning a .22 at age 12, a single barrel shotgun at age 14 and a .38 snub nose at 21 -- not exactly hardcore, but pretty comfortable when shooting my brother's long range sniper thingy with its scope with its big kick -- I'm speaking only from experience. Even the middle aged and old folks I know in Florida who have CCW permits fit my description.

I say what I say with attitude about my experience -- and there could be official profiles, but I doubt it, since gun ownership is so broad-based -- because I'm tired of the "I own guns for protection and defense" argument from them. They never use them for either.

I support liberal and progressive causes and am laughed at when I say that if they're so bent on making their government afraid of them, why don't they "protect and defend" the constitutional rights of peaceful protesters who are being brutalized by mayors' thugs in uniform. They should be more appalled at the local abridgement of constitutional rights IN THEIR MIDST than about some fever dream visions of confiscation and organized police roundups based on 'national' decisions.

They never seem to care to know about "agency" -- who are really running things. They don't read. They watch Fox News. They smugly turn away from the rest of us who want to take names and hold those who hurt their lives accountable under rule of law. They seem to have given up on rule of law. So yeah, I'm pissed at gun owners who talk the talk of gun nuts but are just clinging to them, as I heard Obama once accused of saying.

e: sp, clarity

[Glassunion]

136. Thank you for your post.

It was thoughtful and well written, and does clear up my questions.

DU has been inundated with RW trolls as of late and extremists from the the other side as well. Neither are contributing to thoughtful discussion.

You have, with your your initial post and explanation, helped me understand your point of view.

The reason I initially asked for clarification on what you think a gun owner was, was because I myself am a gun owner. I could not believe that you had the thought that all gun owners fit into your initial post and was hoping (and glad that you set me straight) that you did not mean all gun owners.

You are quite correct when you make the point about a group (gun owners in this case) who are touting "we need to protect our rights!", yet they sit idly by while the rights of others are stomped upon. Personally I feel that civil rights groups of all types do more for their cause when they step out of their niche, and do the same that they wish on themselves. When a gay rights group stands up for reproductive rights, or free speech, etc... When a womens rights group stands up for children's rights, or a minority rights group stands up for the rights of a non-minority, it sends a message that they are indeed for rights, not for themselves.

The problem is that on the whole, gun rights groups (not all) are only selfish, self centered groups that only take a stand for their niche. The do not look beyond themselves.

[ancianita]

138. Glad we agree on some things here. I'm not a gun owner at present, but I'd know how to handle

some kinds that I might have to get my hands on. Got a FOIA app just in case I actually want to own one, but even these days I really don't want to. The group we understand together are part of the culture of fear, in my view, and their clinging to some illusion of safety does nothing to free the unfree in this corporate-captured state. It's they who I have issues with more than the "nutty" survivalists.

[Glassunion]

140. Agreed. nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

79. Nnnnnnope.

[Jazzgirl]

86. I'd like to know why people keep dropping these

hypothetical little bombs and disappearing knowing a flame war is going to happen?

[billh58]

96. You just answered your

own question. A look at their profile reveals a world of information as well.

[Glassunion]

127. When you pull the pin on a hand grenade and drop it, do you stand close or do you run like hell?

[ancianita]

133. Maybe because people equate gun ownership and use issues with life and death issues.

[ileus]

92. If everyone was guaranteed that big of a payday...

everyone would be trying to get in on their own RR action.

[Buzz Clik]

103. Yes, and more. We will have small timers shooting someone of note.

The paranoid freaks will be moving to the country and start playing army.

They are riding the most ridiculous interpretation possible of Biden's exec order comment for all it is worth.

[rightsideout]

111. The threats actually started as soon as Obama was sworn into office

The number of extremist militia groups increased as soon as Obama took office. The Secret Service logged in more threats against Obama then any other President. I suspect it's racially based. And of course since he's a Democrat they got paranoid about gun control even though it was never on the table in his first term.

I imagine with 4 years of hatred towards a sitting black, muslim, socialist, communist dictator and now that he's been re-elected and on top of that, the new threat of possible gun control, they are starting to blow a head gasket. This is obvious in the rhetoric being spewed from these loonies the past week.

But as an organized group of militia people lashing out at a government facility or people I doubt it will happen. The plan will unravel before they are able to pull it off and the Feds will get wind of it before it takes place. They may be able to plan and attempt to do something but the fuse will fiz out before it can really get established.

I see more of a threat from individual lone wolves or two whackos working together then an organized group trying something.

My edit: I forgot the Oklahoma City Bombing. Not really sure now.

[SummerSnow]

177. Something bad is brewing and it is getting worse.

[quinnox]

119. yep, it's just a question of when

Since many of the gun fanatics come from backwoods or rural areas, where racism is common, the re-election of Obama and their fears of a government taking their guns, or a crazed fear of "socialist" government taking over will inevitably lead to a stand-off of some kind. And what also would not surprise me, is if some of our resident "progressive or liberal" gungeoneers, who interestingly, have never said a liberal or progressive thing ever during their stay at DU, will cheer the militia types on as some type of American patriot and that they are defending their 2nd amendment rights in the stand-off.

[ancianita]

134. Turning your guns on your own countrymen, instead of your legitimate enemies who've wrecked

its functionality, is the height of treason and stupidity. It's as un-American as anyone with a gun can be. All this fear fog could be happening by design. That's why we need to keep guns and god fearing types caring about who their true enemies are. And keep talking. Never stop talking. Gun nuts demonstrate that -- similar to the proverbial hammer/nail -- when you live gun culture, everything after a while kinda starts to look like a target, or an enemy target, statements get interpreted defensively. They stop talking.

[HooptieWagon]

142. Uh...most gun onwners will just hide them.

Even if the legal issue was resolved, its going to take an army to go house to house search for guns...I assume you aren't volunteering for that job. And then, where are you going to jail 100 million illegal gun owners, or even 10% of that? Whos going to pay? Do you want your taxes to go up by $20000 to pay for incarcerating a huge percent of the population in the corporate prison complex?
Y'all are living in a fantasyland of rainbows and unicorns...obviously you haven't thought this through one iota.

[ancianita]

143. I'm not in the group that want confiscation or the end of the 2nd Amendment. I'm in the group of

former gun owners who know that more restrictions can be law enforced at point of sale and fined like hell for any infractions thereafter. That's all. This is a bigass country and you're right about the view of incarcerating, but I haven't read anyone here who has that view. Now, "Y'all" who think my group of pragmatists are in fantasyland, y'all do not trust law and order, and the power of the IRS fine -- just like gun nuts.

[HooptieWagon]

153. My mistake then.

I construed your post as supporting a ban and confiscation. I agree that closing the gun show loophole and similar sales regulations will go far in keeping all guns (not just black, scarey looking ones) out of the hands of those who use them criminally.

[ancianita]

144. Also, I don't think you're responding to whomever you think you're responding to. Reread the

two posts above you. Maybe you're responding to someone else? Because your house-to-house response seems to be kind of a non sequitur here.

[HooptieWagon]

141. Its probable that a few mentally ill people will decide to commit suicide by cop.

There will be quite a few gun owners who willingly turn in weapons. Most, however, will simply hide their guns...in some cases selling them on the black market when the price gets high enough.
Quite simply, anyone who thinks a gun ban/confiscation scheme will work is ODing on bath salts.

[geomon666]

145. I sure HOPE so.

No wait, that's the kind of crazy stupid shit gun nuts say.

[markpkessinger]

147. National? No. Here and there, yes. n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

149. It's happened before and the country hasn't gotten any saner since. n/t

[rl6214]

152. What gun nuts are these that you are speaking of?

[ZombieHorde]

155. I really doubt it.

I don't think the US Government is going to have any real gun restrictions.

Maybe magazine size, or something like that, but nothing serious enough to make tons of people go violent. There may be a few folks who get riled up while listening to Alex Jones, and do something violently stupid, but I don't think we are going to see a national Ruby Ridge situation.

[Mr Dixon]

160. SMH

It will lead to a massacre; the Guns Nuts are way over confidence that their guns will save them. The military has plenty of secret weapons to disable and or kill theses clowns with minimal risk to the troops. Hostile forces in a 25 mile radius, drop bomb sucks all the air out of the area, outcome dead Gun Nuts not one shot fired the end.

[billh58]

161. So let me understand this...

The military has "plenty of secret weapons," but you know all about them? Okey dokey...

[Mr Dixon]

170. SMH

Secret meaning not available to the public, case and point

non-lethal heat ray weapon http://phys.org/news/2012-03-military-unveils-non-lethal-ray-weapon.html I’m guessing you can’t buy that in walmart.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/non-lethal.htm
Non-Lethal Weapons
US forces increasingly operate in challenging environments known as military operations other than war. These operations include humanitarian assistance, military support to civil authorities, peacekeeping and peacemaking operations, and non-combatant evacuations. US Forces are involved in support and stability operations (SASO) throughout the globe. Maintaining and establishing law and order, reducing civil disturbances and responding to varied levels of threat have become mission assignments. Countering these with varied levels of force become recurring tasks for military forces involved in joint multinational and interagency operations.
Non-Lethal munitions applications will be used by military personnel to apply the minimum force necessary while performing missions of crowd control and area security at key facilities around the globe. These devices will aid military forces/commanders in situations of hostages rescue, capture of criminals, terrorists, or control of other adversarial persons.
Malodorants and irritants are two types of nonlethal weapons designed to temporarily mark, incapacitate, or drive away persons from an area. Environmental assessments have been performed on the malodorants Bathroom Malodor and Who-Me?, and the irritants Oleoresin Capsicum (OC), CS-Mace, and CN-Mace.
A running gear entanglement system (RGES) is proposed to protect Navy ships in port, and other waterside assets such as museums and marinas. The entanglement device will foul the propeller of unauthorized vessels attempting to approach restricted areas.
A pulsed-energy projectile (PEP) is under development that uses a chemical laser technology to produce a large flash, bang, and shock wave to temporarily disorient and incapacitate individuals in a crowd.
The advanced tactical laser (ATL) concept involves an infrared laser carried in an aircraft for air-to-ground strike missions, providing pinpoint accuracy and minimum damage.
Anti-traction material (ATM) is a very slippery, gel-like substance sprayed on ground surfaces to prevent access to areas by people and vehicles.
Nonlethal airburst munitions are 20mm weapons designed to emplace liquids, aerosols, powders and other objects at a precise location in space.
Thermobaric technology is a nonlethal weapon, in development, that causes extended flash, sound, temperature, and pressure conditions to disorient and/or temporarily incapacitate individuals.
The temporary discomfort and confusion generated by some of these Non-Lethal munitions provides the tactical team the few seconds necessary to exploit the situation by redirecting the actions of a targeted individual or group and enhances the ability to apprehend same. The shade of light green has been selected to be the ammunition color-coding for all Non-lethal ammunition components. Non-Lethal devices are intended to confuse, disorient, or momentarily distract potential threat persons. They are designed to produce only temporary incapacitation to either innocent bystander or threatening individuals.

I guess that is funny too you????????

[billh58]

172. No, but

you are...

[Mr Dixon]

171. Funny i guess

&feature=player_embedded

WTF is your peashooter going to do against this?

[billh58]

173. Don't own a gun

Bubba...

[PoliticalBiker]

163. The sooner we crush those nuts the better

Then we can sprinkle them on our ice cream

[Puzzledtraveller]

164. I noticed many on DU are all for the power of the federal government when a Democrat is in office.

[billh58]

174. And that's a bad thing

how? When Republicans are in office they fuck things up, and then Democrats have to fix it. So, yes Democrats are more responsible and logical than Republicans, and we trust them more.

[Puzzledtraveller]

180. But it won't always be the case, and when they are in office and start the crackdown

what then?

[billh58]

181. Are you sure that

you're on the right discussion board? What "crackdown" are you talking about? You make a post which is critical of Democrats, on a Democratic board, and expect not to be called on it?

Regardless of which political party is in office, Democrats will always be our first line of protection against Republican assholiness. When we hold the Oval Office, it is just so much easier to fix things broken by the Republicans. When we don't hold the Oval Office, we are the first line of defense against bad policy proposed by Republicans.

[Puzzledtraveller]

191. Dont resort to that bull

Im speaking hypothetically, and you know it. The idea that the federal government can do no wrong just because our guy is in the white house is a dangerous mindset and not a very liberal one at that.

[billh58]

195. Not bull

Bubba, and I never said that a Democratic government can "do no wrong." What I actually said (in answer to your original snarky question) was that we Democrats tend to trust Democrats in office because they are Democrats. You seem to be insinuating that there is no difference between the two political parties, or the makeup of our candidates. I call bullshit on your "hypothetical" PUMA scenario.

And yes, I would trust and support "our guy" in the White House anytime, because we have a track record of honesty and working for the people. The Republicans not so much. If you want to "hypothetically" bash Democrats, FR is down the hall and to your right...

[ancianita]

196. Oh, come ON. Stop engaging hypotheticals against pragmatic discussions about real world gun misuse.

The federal government, as understood by Democrats, is to offer economies of scale solutions that most people alone couldn't afford -- regarding health care, public safety through air, water, food, medicine and gun regulation. Along those lines there's PLENTY of argument within the Democratic Party and DU about HOW to best govern toward the greatest good for the greatest number. You can't get away with twisting the meaning of Big Gubmint here with language like "dangerous mindset." You're just making shit up and everyone knows it. Back off this line of argument.

[SpartanDem]

166. National? No

But one of these angry white males is going snap.

[Kablooie]

175. Yes. And it will be commandeered secretly by the NRA.

[graham4anything]

176. wish we could have droned timid tim before he killed all those babies

if the anarchists are attempting to overthrow the gov't
drone them

I think waco is more appropos than ruby ridge anyhow

Janet Reno is #1 in my book.

[farminator3000]

182. no, they'll go to jail.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/burn_the_houses_down_with_the_cops_and_their_families_inside/

NRA-backed Sen. Bob Casey, (D-Pa.) , said this week that in the wake of the Newtown massacre, he is concerned about the number of militias: “I do not know how many of my constituents are in the militia category, but as someone who loves his country and sees the government as a force of good for its citizens, I am clearly alarmed by this segment of our society."

[Dash87]

189. These phonies couldn't kill anything.

They'll never even leave their moms' basements.

[juxtaposed]

203. A lot of little ridges, but there are a lot of nuts in this country.

Alex Jonesites

[nadinbrzezinski]

210. Yes