Militia Raid
- Thread starter FM2Wildcat
- Start date
- Status
Molon Labe
Member
Fosbery
Member
If these guys were planning to do something bad with their weapons then that is what they should be charged with. If they were threatening LEOs then lock them up for that, not the possesion of an inanimate object.
Regardless of law, I believe that everyone has the right to own private property - including tanks, jets etc. If a private company like Airbus can develop a double decker plane and a private company like Virgin can develop a manned space craft then I'm sure they could develop a fighter jet if someone would pay for it (and there are people with enough mony to do so, they just don't). But even if it were impossible for a private individual to own such a thing, they would still have the right to do so in my opinion.
Regardless of law, I believe that everyone has the right to own private property - including tanks, jets etc. If a private company like Airbus can develop a double decker plane and a private company like Virgin can develop a manned space craft then I'm sure they could develop a fighter jet if someone would pay for it (and there are people with enough mony to do so, they just don't). But even if it were impossible for a private individual to own such a thing, they would still have the right to do so in my opinion.
JohnBT
Member
That article is from March, so maybe something has changed. Or maybe the quotes made for publication weren't quite the whole story.
Meanwhile, I didn't know that... "Owners of automatic weapons must pay $200 to license each automatic weapon they own. Militia members say they got around that by rebuilding government-destroyed automatic weapons for their use, according to Smith."
I think I'll try it and see what happens. On second thought, I won't.
John
Meanwhile, I didn't know that... "Owners of automatic weapons must pay $200 to license each automatic weapon they own. Militia members say they got around that by rebuilding government-destroyed automatic weapons for their use, according to Smith."
I think I'll try it and see what happens. On second thought, I won't.
John
sacp81170a
Member
The truth is part of an ongoing investigation of which I don't have much knowledge, so I can't comment. Wait for the actual court case and you may get an eye opener. I repeat, this was not a group of Boy Scouts, no matter how nice a face they put on for some reporters. Just because our sheriff met with them over donuts and coffee doesn't mean he gave them his blessing, in spite of what was written in a newspaper article. I'm glad we've got a sheriff like Tim Helder (who is a Democrat, BTW) who believes in the RKBA. Notice that when he said there's nothing wrong with owning automatic weapons he *didn't* say that these guys' weapons were legal. You're reading things into the aricle that aren't there because of the tone the reporter took.
It's not unusual for some members of a group to be more extreme than others.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Lucky said:
Because I read more than just that one paragraph and therefore I recognize the distinction between the unorganized and organized militia. I have also read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist debates on the militia and understand the context that the Militia Act of 1792 was formed in (10 U.S.C. 311)
You realize the the current definition of the unorganized militia includes convicted violent felons IN prison right now? If I interpret your argument that the section describing the unorganized militia justifies federal constitutional protection for people to organize their own militias, then would these felons have the same right to bear arms and organize into their own militias?
The unorganized militia is the pool from which the organized militia is drawn. It is the organized militia that is subject to state authority; but it does logically follow from this that the state can stop the unorganized militia from organizing on its own contrary to the state's authority to name officers and train.
That isn't what they wrote in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution though, is it? They just as clearly wrote that the States have the authority to appoint officers and train according to the discipline provided by Congress.
I think you misunderstood my point. Obviously all armed citizens are not military members. However, a key feature of our government is that the military should be subordinate to the elected civil government. Once armed citizens voluntarily join together and start acting like an independent military organization (a private militia) they are forming a military force and the rest of the citizens have a right to demand that this force be subordinate to the elected civil authority.
Also, we have dragged the original thread a bit off topic. I have created a new thread where this conversation can be continued by anyone who wishes to here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2849128#post2849128
Please use this thread for all future replies to the subjects of the law governing militia, whether private militias are protected by the Constitution, and who is authorized to control the militia. Let's try to get this thread back on to the subject of the original incident. I also encourage other sub-topics to start a split off and start a new thread before this post reaches 10 pages
gc70
Member
The article originally cited was dated November 9, 2006.
A subsequent article provides more details:
An additional article from a different source report:
If you give a newspaper an interview in which you declare that you are violating the law, you just might be inviting a legal confrontation.
Third_Rail
Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,979
Well, I've ready many articles on this now, and not one has gotten this right. Many who would legally own MGs aren't able to because of USC Title 18 922 (o). I got rather fed up with that and decided to write a letter off to one of the newspapers. If more of us would send off letters like this, the public may actually ask that the registry be opened for those that wish to obey the law.
For those of you who haven't seen the article I've referenced, it's here.
For those of you who haven't seen the article I've referenced, it's here.
molon labe asked;
Yes I am saying that. If your militia ever gets the kind of publicity this group in Arkansas just got, you will do as much damage to RKBA as they are.
Any good works that you do, belonging to pro RKBA organizations, writing letters to the editor, contacting your elected representatives will be cancelled out by your membership in a militia should it ever run afoul of the law. In fact all of those good things you've done will be a stain on the RKBA movement.
It doesn't matter how careful you are or how dedicated to defending the original intent of the founding fathers, the press will marginalize you and your group into a bloodthirsty group of anti-government fanantics. The story will read that the brave federal and local agents saved the community from molon labe's militia taking over and conducting public exectutions of anyone who didn't meet your political and moral standards. Your membership in pro-RKBA organizations may come out and all the members of those organizations will be painted with the same broad brush.
What if the next Timothy McVeigh has some contact with your organization? Do you think the average person on the street knows what contacts McVeigh really had with a militia? No, they don't. They know what the media told them.
Private armies are a bad idea. They are illegal in 28 states. They do nothing to further RKBA and they are not credible military force. I base my judgement of their effectiveness on 28 years in the US Army, 21 of those years spent as an Infantryman and the intelligence information I've seen as a police officer on these organizations and personal contact with members of local militia, posse, klan, aryan nation and other organizations.
Jeff
Yes I am saying that. If your militia ever gets the kind of publicity this group in Arkansas just got, you will do as much damage to RKBA as they are.
Any good works that you do, belonging to pro RKBA organizations, writing letters to the editor, contacting your elected representatives will be cancelled out by your membership in a militia should it ever run afoul of the law. In fact all of those good things you've done will be a stain on the RKBA movement.
It doesn't matter how careful you are or how dedicated to defending the original intent of the founding fathers, the press will marginalize you and your group into a bloodthirsty group of anti-government fanantics. The story will read that the brave federal and local agents saved the community from molon labe's militia taking over and conducting public exectutions of anyone who didn't meet your political and moral standards. Your membership in pro-RKBA organizations may come out and all the members of those organizations will be painted with the same broad brush.
What if the next Timothy McVeigh has some contact with your organization? Do you think the average person on the street knows what contacts McVeigh really had with a militia? No, they don't. They know what the media told them.
Private armies are a bad idea. They are illegal in 28 states. They do nothing to further RKBA and they are not credible military force. I base my judgement of their effectiveness on 28 years in the US Army, 21 of those years spent as an Infantryman and the intelligence information I've seen as a police officer on these organizations and personal contact with members of local militia, posse, klan, aryan nation and other organizations.
Jeff
Derby FALs
Member In Memoriam
That's all going to happen sooner or later. The people that try to take back this country will be small in numbers and support. If it's God's will it will be successful.
The modern militia movement will not take back this country. The best that movement could hope for is to make or society like that in Iraq at the moment. All of the various groups have their own agenda based on their individual beliefs. If they managed to overthrow the government, they would immediately go to war against each other.
The thought that the militia movement could somehow restore a constitutional republic in this country is quaint, but totally unrealistic. A constitutional republic can only be restored through a culture change in the population. You're not going to do it by force of arms. It's not going to happen.
It took one third of the population to win the revolution. NONE of these modern day militia groups could garner the support of 1/100000000 of the US population. I'm not talking about people who'll join a mailing list, I'm talking about people who will sacrfice their freedom and possibly their lives for the cause.
Jeff
The thought that the militia movement could somehow restore a constitutional republic in this country is quaint, but totally unrealistic. A constitutional republic can only be restored through a culture change in the population. You're not going to do it by force of arms. It's not going to happen.
It took one third of the population to win the revolution. NONE of these modern day militia groups could garner the support of 1/100000000 of the US population. I'm not talking about people who'll join a mailing list, I'm talking about people who will sacrfice their freedom and possibly their lives for the cause.
Jeff
thexrayboy
Member
Jeff is probably right on this one. 95+% of the population will not be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice. Doesn't mean an overthrow of the current
political landscape to return to a constitutional republic would not be a good thing. It just means it's unlikely to occur. Our dear leaders in Washington have applied the bread and circus theory to mind control long enough to
soften the minds and bodies of most Americans. We as a nation show we are unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to stand up against Islamofascism.
We certainly lack the moral certitude as a country to go down that path of
revolution. I really hate to say it but I feel we as a free country are doomed.
We are past the tipping point where we could have taken back our government from the career politicians who intend to rule not govern.
political landscape to return to a constitutional republic would not be a good thing. It just means it's unlikely to occur. Our dear leaders in Washington have applied the bread and circus theory to mind control long enough to
soften the minds and bodies of most Americans. We as a nation show we are unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to stand up against Islamofascism.
We certainly lack the moral certitude as a country to go down that path of
revolution. I really hate to say it but I feel we as a free country are doomed.
We are past the tipping point where we could have taken back our government from the career politicians who intend to rule not govern.
Molon Labe
Member
So should the good mods of THR throw me out?
After all, I believe in individuality liberty, which is apparently something you don't believe. If you believe I am mistaken, feel free to retort...
If they wanted do. I assume most of them would be content
if a) someone nuked D.C.
b) ATF disappeared
c) someone downsized the federal government
I'm not sure about them militia members... but people in this forum seem to recognize that war is not a desirable state of affairs.
What you have in Iraq are two religious sects, one of which has been oppressed by the less numerous other one for thirty years. To make things worse.. they widely intermingled geographically, in places like Bagdhad.
And then you have foreign agents (likes of Zarqawi, who gladly spilled blood, knowing full well that violence leads to more violence.. especially if there is an ample supply of idle testosterone poisoned teenagers)
Being second-class citizen and then suddenly getting a chance to get back at the other group..
There's no such dynamic in the US.
Surely.. you have minorities that would consider it funo reenact some WWII Einsatzgruppen behaviour, this time against blacks, but saner minds would surely prevail.
That dynamic is alive and well in the US. Whether it's La Raza calling for the elimination of Europeans from the SouthWest US, or certain elements in the black community calling for reparations by any means necessary, the desire for revenge and ethnic cleansing is present here.
FM2Wildcat
member
Quoting cropcirclewalker
Trolls aren't interested in the truth, trolls exist only to cause trouble. It's not what they say, it's how they say it.
It was not my intent to cause trouble, only to fire debate as to whether self appointed militias are legal and what their true agendas really are.
Name calling, the second to last refuge of the bully and the uneducated. The last refuge is threaten or pound someone physically until they see things your way since your unable to convince anyone of your anarchist opinion with insightful, legal and truthful views.
After stomaching as much as I could of your opinion here is my reply.
The reason you have called me a troll is because you know the anarchist militia's cannot stand the light of truth and the law.
The militia's idea of nirvana is to oversee the country by rule of your guns and extremist militant/ religious views.
How do you know god is on your side? The German infantry in WWII had "God is on our side" written on the inside of their helmets.
God's hand has nothing to do with mans struggles.
The militias know not how to bring people together other than by rule of the boot and gun and appealing to their members most base instincts. Your not doing it for the good of the country, Your doing it to be hero's and respected men as you have failed to do so in your lifetimes and resent those who are successful through education, self discipline and plain old hard work.
The militias know not how to bring about changes any other way.
The militias know not how to bring about change by getting educated and well balanced successful people elected to office because your views are not balanced and well thought out and no person is going to get elected with extremist anarchist views.
Why didn't you join the military, that's where all the good hardware is, or go to college or law school and try to bring about change from within the system?
Let's take a look at your militias of today. Not exactly a group membership of brilliant people is it? Mostly disgruntled dead enders, Aryans, skin heads and those that have run afoul of the law by their own doing.
Show me a militia with ranks filled by respected civic leaders, PhD's,businessmen and honorably discharged and generally well respected military vets and officers.
I understand why you hate me and call me a troll, it's because you know I see through your true agenda and called you out on it.
Your agenda is endangering responsible and law abiding gun owners right to bear arms just like criminals do when they commit a crime while using a gun. The current form of militia's irresponsible methods are putting all law abiding gun owners under the microscope and bringing the heat down on us.
Who did Timothy McVeigh hang out with and get his views from? Your average separatist militia's who think they are smarter than everyone else and know the only way for everyone and think the rest of the American citizenry is blind to what is going on in this country.
I judge not a man by his skin color, I judge a man by what come out of his mouth and his life accomplishments achieved by education,hard work and self discipline.
Don't blame me and call me a troll, blame the justice and light of the truth.
I'll ask the militia members here again, where were you at Waco?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
Trolls aren't interested in the truth, trolls exist only to cause trouble. It's not what they say, it's how they say it.
It was not my intent to cause trouble, only to fire debate as to whether self appointed militias are legal and what their true agendas really are.
Name calling, the second to last refuge of the bully and the uneducated. The last refuge is threaten or pound someone physically until they see things your way since your unable to convince anyone of your anarchist opinion with insightful, legal and truthful views.
After stomaching as much as I could of your opinion here is my reply.
The reason you have called me a troll is because you know the anarchist militia's cannot stand the light of truth and the law.
The militia's idea of nirvana is to oversee the country by rule of your guns and extremist militant/ religious views.
How do you know god is on your side? The German infantry in WWII had "God is on our side" written on the inside of their helmets.
God's hand has nothing to do with mans struggles.
The militias know not how to bring people together other than by rule of the boot and gun and appealing to their members most base instincts. Your not doing it for the good of the country, Your doing it to be hero's and respected men as you have failed to do so in your lifetimes and resent those who are successful through education, self discipline and plain old hard work.
The militias know not how to bring about changes any other way.
The militias know not how to bring about change by getting educated and well balanced successful people elected to office because your views are not balanced and well thought out and no person is going to get elected with extremist anarchist views.
Why didn't you join the military, that's where all the good hardware is, or go to college or law school and try to bring about change from within the system?
Let's take a look at your militias of today. Not exactly a group membership of brilliant people is it? Mostly disgruntled dead enders, Aryans, skin heads and those that have run afoul of the law by their own doing.
Show me a militia with ranks filled by respected civic leaders, PhD's,businessmen and honorably discharged and generally well respected military vets and officers.
I understand why you hate me and call me a troll, it's because you know I see through your true agenda and called you out on it.
Your agenda is endangering responsible and law abiding gun owners right to bear arms just like criminals do when they commit a crime while using a gun. The current form of militia's irresponsible methods are putting all law abiding gun owners under the microscope and bringing the heat down on us.
Who did Timothy McVeigh hang out with and get his views from? Your average separatist militia's who think they are smarter than everyone else and know the only way for everyone and think the rest of the American citizenry is blind to what is going on in this country.
I judge not a man by his skin color, I judge a man by what come out of his mouth and his life accomplishments achieved by education,hard work and self discipline.
Don't blame me and call me a troll, blame the justice and light of the truth.
I'll ask the militia members here again, where were you at Waco?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
I find it very sad to see so many people here are absolutely positive that a citizen can not own an artillery piece or armed aircraft. How wrong can you be? It may be against several state laws (and it is against a few state laws that I know of), but in order to own them all you have to do is the paperwork the feds require. There is a gent here in Utah that has one of the largest tank collections in private hands and all the main guns are functional.
There are many individuals around the country that own WWII to current fighter aircraft and helos that have gun systems on them. Not to mention all the private corporations that own armed aircraft. Do you think General Dynamics or Raytheon are government owned companies.
Even more distressing are the number of people who think just because YOU dont see a need for owning one, that other people should not be able to. Why do you care? When was the last time you heard of a shool shooting with a recoiless rifle (in America). If people want to pay the tax and then spend the considerable expense of coming up with their own solid shot or paint rounds to shoot out of their pack howitzer, why do you care? Do you think all of the ones in Veterans Day parades and that are fired at the Fourth of July events are all government owned? No, they are generally privately held by people who take a great deal of pride in their ownership, restoration and history. If they are not shooting up the neighborhood, why do so many of you care? My issue is with the stupid guys in the story who did not bother to do the simple form 1 and pay the $200 tax. With out these people who go thru the considerable expense we could loose some very real and important pieces of history. I dont recall the government restoring and flying around a B-17 for people to tour at air shows.
Remember people, the 2A is not about hunting or hunting guns. It is about the ability of the people to use their arms to over throw an oppressive government. Period. And if you think a small cannon can not be very effective in bringing down a government the size of ours, you should pay more attention to what the Afghans have done in the past. A single shot from it can have a much greater effect than the resulting impact of a single round.
There are many individuals around the country that own WWII to current fighter aircraft and helos that have gun systems on them. Not to mention all the private corporations that own armed aircraft. Do you think General Dynamics or Raytheon are government owned companies.
Even more distressing are the number of people who think just because YOU dont see a need for owning one, that other people should not be able to. Why do you care? When was the last time you heard of a shool shooting with a recoiless rifle (in America). If people want to pay the tax and then spend the considerable expense of coming up with their own solid shot or paint rounds to shoot out of their pack howitzer, why do you care? Do you think all of the ones in Veterans Day parades and that are fired at the Fourth of July events are all government owned? No, they are generally privately held by people who take a great deal of pride in their ownership, restoration and history. If they are not shooting up the neighborhood, why do so many of you care? My issue is with the stupid guys in the story who did not bother to do the simple form 1 and pay the $200 tax. With out these people who go thru the considerable expense we could loose some very real and important pieces of history. I dont recall the government restoring and flying around a B-17 for people to tour at air shows.
Remember people, the 2A is not about hunting or hunting guns. It is about the ability of the people to use their arms to over throw an oppressive government. Period. And if you think a small cannon can not be very effective in bringing down a government the size of ours, you should pay more attention to what the Afghans have done in the past. A single shot from it can have a much greater effect than the resulting impact of a single round.
JohnBT
Member
" find it very sad to see so many people here are absolutely positive that a citizen can not own an artillery piece or armed aircraft."
I guess I've missed all those folks that think that. Many people own nice things. I would if I could afford to store them. Meanwhile, I thought we were discussing the legality of militias.
_______________
"95+% of the population will not be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice."
You mean dying? "Dyin' ain't much of a living..." <Insert that related quote from the Patton movie>
John
I guess I've missed all those folks that think that. Many people own nice things. I would if I could afford to store them. Meanwhile, I thought we were discussing the legality of militias.
_______________
"95+% of the population will not be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice."
You mean dying? "Dyin' ain't much of a living..." <Insert that related quote from the Patton movie>
John
Tommygunn
Member
Jeff White said:
One third of the Colony's population sympathized with the seperatists. About another third were indifferent. The rest were Tories and of course sided with the redcoats.
But 1/3 of those who sympathized with the George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons, only a very small per centage of those actually turned out with guns for military service. And of those who did many were poorly equiped, poorly trained (if at all) and not really fit to stand up against the largest and most professional standing army on the face of the planet at the time. It was "on-the-job-training" time for most, and at a very, very bitter cost.
Washington got his butt kicked out of New York City all the way to Trenton before he scored a victory, and even that was only because ONE British officer stuffed a note in a pocket instead of reading it. The French joined later in the war; by then, they were fairly certain the Yanks had a pretty decent chance, and their real reason wasn't their great love of our wannabe colony, but to tweak the British Crown's nose.
In the end the colonists won mainly because the British lost patience and the war was beginning to hurt them economically. This was as much the root of American victory as any military victory.
And that very likely is the bitter truth, in the end. I suspect that a militia may experience some success early on....but especially if the military is brought in, that "success" will be transitory, and will be quickly "gone with the wind." I have to wonder how many of these individuals really do have the moxie to go out and do this. In Washington's day he fought as much against freezing weather as he did the enemy, and it's a wonder his barefoot soldiers did keep following him. Either they were true believers or knew they'd painted themselves into a corner and there was no "going back."
That sort of moxie just isn't around today.
Those that do have the moxie and the guts...may have to make do with Emiliano Zapato's old maxim; "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees."
As for me I guess I will keep voting, keep donating to pro RKBA groups, keep up with politics (yuck) and...pray real hard......
Molon Labe said;
No, not unless you violate the rules. We can civilly debate our opposing points of view until we wear our keyboards out.
I'm all for individual liberty. I'm also a realist. Armed political parties are not going to defend individual liberty. And that's what the so called modern militia is, an armed political party. Why have you formed an armed political party? Do you feel that you are unable to win at the ballot box so you want the spectre of your militia unit taking over by force to influence the political debate where you live? If not, what is your mission statement? Under what conditions do you plan on using your weapons? If it's all on the up and up, none of this should be classified information.
The way to defend individual liberty is to change our culture back to one that admires individual liberty. It's not going to be an easy or short process and it can't be done by force of arms.
Y.T. said;
It's a little more complicated then that. there are also tribal and family grudges being acted out. Which is exactly what we'd have if all of the many armed militia groups in this country would do if they managed to unite and over throw the government. Each one would want things to follow their doctrine and beliefs in it's area of influence. People who didn't follow the new rules would most likely be punished, banished or executed.
History has shown that the most dangerous part of an insurgency where different groups have united to overthrow a government has been getting them to unite and give up their arms as they create a new coalition government. The US would be no different. We're too balkanized to unite all the different forces under one banner to run things after the hated government was overthrown.
Have you taken a look at all the different views of all the armed militia groups publically operating in this country? There would be attacks against everyone who isn't like them or didn't choose their particular life philosophy.
Jeff
No, not unless you violate the rules. We can civilly debate our opposing points of view until we wear our keyboards out.
I'm all for individual liberty. I'm also a realist. Armed political parties are not going to defend individual liberty. And that's what the so called modern militia is, an armed political party. Why have you formed an armed political party? Do you feel that you are unable to win at the ballot box so you want the spectre of your militia unit taking over by force to influence the political debate where you live? If not, what is your mission statement? Under what conditions do you plan on using your weapons? If it's all on the up and up, none of this should be classified information.
The way to defend individual liberty is to change our culture back to one that admires individual liberty. It's not going to be an easy or short process and it can't be done by force of arms.
Y.T. said;
It's a little more complicated then that. there are also tribal and family grudges being acted out. Which is exactly what we'd have if all of the many armed militia groups in this country would do if they managed to unite and over throw the government. Each one would want things to follow their doctrine and beliefs in it's area of influence. People who didn't follow the new rules would most likely be punished, banished or executed.
History has shown that the most dangerous part of an insurgency where different groups have united to overthrow a government has been getting them to unite and give up their arms as they create a new coalition government. The US would be no different. We're too balkanized to unite all the different forces under one banner to run things after the hated government was overthrown.
Have you taken a look at all the different views of all the armed militia groups publically operating in this country? There would be attacks against everyone who isn't like them or didn't choose their particular life philosophy.
Jeff
Molon Labe
Member
You know, I was beginning to think most of the THR mods were a bunch of closet liberals who did not have the faintest idea of why we're armed. But then I read PvtPyle's post above, and my faith in THR has been renewed.PvtPyle said:
Yes, Molon Labe, we're like the borg, and we all think exactly the same, and our only purpose in life is to pick on YOU.
Give it a rest.
Mods are a bunch of normal human individuals, who disagree with each other about politics all of the time.
Give it a rest.
Mods are a bunch of normal human individuals, who disagree with each other about politics all of the time.
2ndamd
Member
Jeff
Just because the "Militia" groups (or whatever they call themselves) preach caution and distrust of all governmental bodies does not make them criminal.
Even white supremist groups have the right to free speech and to assemble. (as abhorrant as their views may be to many people)
If a member of society breaks the law then go ahead and prosecute them. But, in this great country of ours even the most unpopular mindset (there are many) have a right to believe what they want. The 1st amd is protected by the 2nd amd.
In the original article though do we really feel that owning fully automatic weapons and an old heavy cannon are indicative of dangerousness? Heck more people are killed by Doctors malfeasance in a year than all the firearms put togther (including an old cannon
).
I feel that a public condemnation of a group of people that are expressing their 1st and 2nd amd rights is EXACTLY how the tragedy at Waco could have been prevented.
Personally, I think any Native American group or Tribe has every right to preach hate and distrust of the U.S. Government. I mean afterall they had about:
4000 treaties with the US Govt
3998 treaties were broken or violated by the US Govt
1 Treaty is still intatc
1 treaty was broken by a Native American tribe.
(the above figures are estimates only)
I mean talk about a group of people that has every right to preach distrust of the US Govt?
I embrace all Americans to stand up and fight for their liberty. I do believe that specific threats of violence are illegal. But a mere posturing is not criminal. For example: If someone says "I will fight for liberty to the death." They are making a broad general statement of their determination. Not a proclamation of war.
Now, if a group goes overboard and begins to make specific threats to local Govt bodies? Well, then they deserve to be watched.
I think in Waco the guy the ATF was looking for was at a gun show with the local Sherriff? (But, do not quote me on that) Clearly not a person waging war against the US Govt.
Just because the "Militia" groups (or whatever they call themselves) preach caution and distrust of all governmental bodies does not make them criminal.
Even white supremist groups have the right to free speech and to assemble. (as abhorrant as their views may be to many people)
If a member of society breaks the law then go ahead and prosecute them. But, in this great country of ours even the most unpopular mindset (there are many) have a right to believe what they want. The 1st amd is protected by the 2nd amd.
In the original article though do we really feel that owning fully automatic weapons and an old heavy cannon are indicative of dangerousness? Heck more people are killed by Doctors malfeasance in a year than all the firearms put togther (including an old cannon
).I feel that a public condemnation of a group of people that are expressing their 1st and 2nd amd rights is EXACTLY how the tragedy at Waco could have been prevented.
Personally, I think any Native American group or Tribe has every right to preach hate and distrust of the U.S. Government. I mean afterall they had about:
4000 treaties with the US Govt
3998 treaties were broken or violated by the US Govt
1 Treaty is still intatc
1 treaty was broken by a Native American tribe.
(the above figures are estimates only)
I mean talk about a group of people that has every right to preach distrust of the US Govt?
I embrace all Americans to stand up and fight for their liberty. I do believe that specific threats of violence are illegal. But a mere posturing is not criminal. For example: If someone says "I will fight for liberty to the death." They are making a broad general statement of their determination. Not a proclamation of war.
Now, if a group goes overboard and begins to make specific threats to local Govt bodies? Well, then they deserve to be watched.
I think in Waco the guy the ATF was looking for was at a gun show with the local Sherriff? (But, do not quote me on that) Clearly not a person waging war against the US Govt.
Joe Demko
Member
I'd like one of our militia members to step up and answer Jeff White's question. Why does your militia have guns? He makes an excellent point that the so-called modern militias are armed (fringe) political parties, nothing more.
- Status
