There is a full on assault on the 2nd amendment. The socialists have been emboldened by the last election, especially the MSM. The media proved that they control what hot topics will resonate with the public.

AlexB is a fool liberal but he’s half right. It won’t be the U.S. military armed civilians will have to face, or at least not solely. Think blue helmets and epicanthic flaps. By the millions.

S.P. Link on January 9, 2013 at 6:05 PM

Will they stack like cord wood?

McC is a common type: he made rank based on his family connections then thumbed his nose at it because he knew he could. He figured he could let his people went to Rolling Stone, and get by with it because he didn’t do it himself: more fool him.

I will say what I said there: I would not serve with him or risk dying in his company. I am a former Naval Intelligence Office who got out just because I saw his type coming.

HEY, STAN ! . . . . . . . . .
.
. . . . . . . We need some serious “politician-control” laws.

The ones already on the books aren’t working.

listens2glenn on January 8, 2013 at 4:04 PM

.
Just like more gun control laws won’t work for those who will ignore or disobey them anyway, more “politician-control” laws won’t work, as the politicians will simply ignore them as they do the ones in effect now.

What we need is criminal politician enforcement from OUTSIDE CONgress, because we’ve seen what self-enforcement gets us….either a “nothing to see here” investigation, a slap on the wrist or a sternly worded letter for the offender at best, usually, if even that.

hawkeye54 on January 8, 2013 at 4:34 PM

.
I think you missed my sarcastic absurdity.

Either way, you are of course exactly correct:

“What we need is criminal politician enforcement from OUTSIDE Congress.”

Which is why We, the People, need weapons as good as the Colonels and Generals.

What the hell do civilians need assault weapons and 30-bullet clips for? You don’t need that to “protect your family”. A nice baseball bat works just fine, but a non-automatic shotgun with only a few bullets in it is more than enough if you want fire power.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

.
My apologies, Alex’. I missed this at the top of your comment.
.
That openning statement tells us everything you know about firearms, right there.

When the US government is trying to limit civilians’ ownership of weapons it is not because the government is scared of those civilians. It is because it is scared FOR those civilians. And you silly goats keep mentioning Mao and Stalin and Hitler… what the hell do you know of the armies that these 3 commanded? Hitler almost beat the might of the Soviet Red Army (and all the allies put together) with all the weapons that they’ve had. You think a bunch of civilians armed with inferior weapons, untrained in soldiering, could have stopped either of these 3 maniacs?

Listen to Stanley McChrystal – a guy who has killed people with his bare hands and knows more about soldiering and weapons than all of you put together.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Have you read the history of Soviet Russia? Do you know what shape those soldiers were in?
Do you know how THOUSANDS & TENS of THOUSANDS of them died? They didn’t have to. The numbers that were SACRIFICED was outrageous & not necessary.The Soviets beat Hitler DESPITE everything.
And regarding the Federal government & it’s love of us & just wants to protect & care for us?
WTF is wrong with you?
Your history is sorely lacking.
You don’t think a benevolent government can’t turn against its citizens?
Did yoiu ever hear of WACO?

If the government comes after civilians, the civilians will be outgunned 1000:1 in terms of firepower.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

.
Even IF … all our military ‘ground forces’ joined with the government in a nationwide gun-grab effort (they won’t), that wouldn’t be true.
.

When the US government is trying to limit civilians’ ownership of weapons it is not because the government is scared of those civilians. It is because it is scared FOR those civilians.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

.
B U L L ( E X P L E T I V E )

Just ask the Branch Davidians and Randy Weaver.
.

And you silly goats keep mentioning Mao and Stalin and Hitler… what the hell do you know of the armies that these 3 commanded? Hitler almost beat the might of the Soviet Red Army (and all the allies put together) with all the weapons that they’ve had. You think a bunch of civilians armed with inferior weapons, untrained in soldiering, could have stopped either of these 3 maniacs?

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

.
1) – We know at least as much about “Mao and Stalin and Hitler” as you do.
Probably more, I’m guessing.

2) – Hitler was stopped by the English Channel, and a handful of British Fighter pilots.
“Never have so many owed so much, to so few”

3) – Yes, they would … semi-auto civilian models of military “light-arms” are NOT that “inferior”.
.

Listen to Stanley McChrystal – a guy who has killed people with his bare hands and knows more about soldiering and weapons than all of you put together.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

.
Stanley McChrystal’s “pedigree of qualifications” become meaningless, if he’s aiding and abetting the abolition of the current U.S. Constitution in favor of the WCPA’s Constitution.

So what will civilians do about aaaaalll the other weapons that the US government possesses? Drones, high-powered sniper rifles with ranges of 2+ miles, tanks, fighter jets, RPGs, massive ordinance bombs, etc. etc. etc…

If the government comes after civilians, the civilians will be outgunned 1000:1 in terms of firepower.

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Hey shit for brains… Ever hear of a little country called Vietnam? How about Iraq or maybe you have heard of it’s neighbor Afghanistan? Less then 1% of the population of Afghanistan has held off the full might of the United States Military for a good ten years now. Every military commander on earth knows that you cannot defeat a determined and entrenched domestic insurgency. It’s never been done anywhere. EVER.

1% of American firearms owners equal roughly 800,000 armed insurgents. 10% of American Firearms owners, (roughly 8 million insurgents) would constitute the largest standing army in world history.

If 50,000 armed determined insurgents in Afghanistan can hold off the US Military for 10 years, what do you think 8 million determined armed insurgents here can do?

How peculiar. Generals become multi-star generals because they are either good at or lucky with ‘program management’ tasks. Rarely for leading troops.
King Putt is intent on bringing down the status of the United States … by any and all means possible. As any good poker player will tell you, it doesn’t matter what your opponent SAYS, pay attention to what he DOES.
A long time ago there was a interchange prior to WWI, between a General of the Kaisers formidable army infantry. He posed a tactical problem to a member of the Swiss militia where he asked the local commander, “What would you do if I amassed one million of my infantry on your border and invaded?”
The Swiss militia leader not blinking said, “I would disperse my men appropriately to our positions, whereupon each man would fire five shots, and we’d all go home.”

AlexB on January 9, 2013 at 10:36 AM

If you or others want to repeal the Second Amendment, there is a process for doing so. But unfortunately you won’t- instead choosing to obfuscate and dilute that right using the law and processes which have no basis for such endeavors in a Constitutional Republic. That’s called tyranny, no matter how you slice it.

The question is not whether citizens need it. WE are guaranteed it as articulated by the Second Amendment in its text;

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

And there are thankfully those of us who believe we should not sacrifice our liberties and rights just because someone says it is so or attempts a wrongful plea based on emotion. Emotion which attempts to circumvent reason and democratic process.

There are millions of lawful gun owners in our country who behave responsibly. They won’t be tarred or have their rights removed because of acts by a few criminal maniacs with mental health issues, who under current law could not even purchase a weapon.

How about we embark on resolving these issues by not coddling individuals with mental health issues to ensure they don’t feel “different” or “left-out”? How about we examine the use of psychotropic drugs by these individuals? How about we examine “their” right not be forced into treatment- at the expense of the rights of the many people they killed?

None of what is being proposed by the anti-gun forces would have made a difference in these tragedies. Yet those forces disgustingly stand on the backs of their victims to further personal agendas. I can think of very few actions more contemptible and dishonest. They, and you, should be ashamed.

McChrystal is just a man with an opinion, and not a very intellectual or factual one. He’s not a king nor does he hold a special place in our democracy. He’s simply another advocate for a certain brand of politics and his musing should be treated with that perspective- not yielded to.

VP Biden states Obama is considerig issuing EXECUTIVE ORDERS, thereby BY-PASSING CONGRESS, to institute new gun laws / regulations as a result of the recent shooting crime…

2ND TERM, NOTHING TO LOSE – OBAMA ‘GOING FOR BROKE’!

The whole reason for the second amendment is to protect yourself from hypothetical government tyranny, right? So what will civilians do about aaaaalll the other weapons that the US government possesses? Drones, high-powered sniper rifles with ranges of 2+ miles, tanks, fighter jets, RPGs, massive ordinance bombs, etc. etc. etc…

If the government comes after civilians, the civilians will be outgunned 1000:1 in terms of firepower.

When the US government is trying to limit civilians’ ownership of weapons it is not because the government is scared of those civilians. It is because it is scared FOR those civilians. And you silly goats keep mentioning Mao and Stalin and Hitler… what the hell do you know of the armies that these 3 commanded? Hitler almost beat the might of the Soviet Red Army (and all the allies put together) with all the weapons that they’ve had. You think a bunch of civilians armed with inferior weapons, untrained in soldiering, could have stopped either of these 3 maniacs?

Listen to Stanley McChrystal – a guy who has killed people with his bare hands and knows more about soldiering and weapons than all of you put together.

MaiDee on January 9, 2013 at 6:34 AM

Except for the ones that have cheated on the wives, misappropriated government funds and sexually harassed or abused their underlings . . . my count is 5 so far.

Why should we listen or debate what he says? Does he speak for anyone but himself? Should we simply turn over our rights and ability to speak intelligently because others allege he has- credibility?

What McChrystal has done is offered his opinion. And it’s an opinion not grounded in facts or reality.

This isn’t some third-world banana republic where tyranny from one or a majority rules. We are a Constitutional Republic and a nation of laws whose representatives serve at the people’s pleasure. Mr McChrystal best remember that.

The sine qua non of liberals is to use emotion and alleged “status” to distract from the real problems and issues. So in place of facts, intellectual discussion and solutions to actual problems they supplant McChrystal. “Oh, yes, well if HE says so it must be right.”

Nonsense, what he stated doesn’t even make sense in the proper context. He’s just another player in the liberal mob wearing a different color suit.

SWalker on January 8, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Definitions of words have been twisted & hijacked.
And since people do not know the history of this country anymore bcs they are content to let Hollywood & the media teach it to them through propaganda & lies, it’s no wonder that people actually believe the 2nd is about hunting or just arming an army & not the individual.

Regarding this general, I am sure he received his promotions bcs he is liberal. When you have liberals in charge of things, the packing of liberals into important positions is a must.
They succeeded in education, the courts, why not the military?
This is no surprise.
Sure there are a lot of conservative types in the military. But let’s not fool ourselves about a lot of the higher ups.
With a progressive federal government in charge, you are going to get these positions filled up with those who tow the liberal mindset.
Look at the Forest Service & Fish & Wildlife agencies, BLM, etc.
These agencies used to be filled with people who grew up on the land, like on farms & ranches & had common sense.
Now these kinds of people are passed over for promotions or hire. At least from some of the oldsters I have personally known who were in these agencies.
Once the government take over is complete, we’re going to be seeing a lot more aggression from all facets of the government in the violation of our rights.
It will accelerate.
So that 2nd Amendment is on they need to really get rid of.
You know, I find it interesting the left is so concerned & outraged about the deaths at Sandy Hook.
But yet, they were so complicit in the deaths, caused by the GOVERNMENT, at Waco. That was murder. It doesn’t matter if Koresh was nuts, what happened at Waco was the Federal government murdering people: CHILDREN.
And we got crickets from the media about it.
This will get worse. Even with a Republican POTUS it will still get worse.
Bcs the people do not know their history.