Quote of the day—43north

1) NO handguns.  Handgun Control Inc., became the Brady Campaign.

2) NO rifles, and no hunting, as that’s the well-worn excuse for having the damned things.
People get their food from the grocery store, not the open range.  The danger of these guns, which can all be traced to some current or long-ago military arm, is too great.  Become a vegan, all animal-sourced foods are cruel.

3) NO shotguns. 
The FBI crime lab can’t do a “ballistic fingerprint” of a shotgun.  They’re outlawed by the Geneva Convention for use in war.  They contribute lead contamination and undermine threatened and endangered species preservation efforts.

July 23, 2012
Comment to The NRA claims 4.3 million members. The Brady Campaign might have under 29,000.
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns. ALL your guns.—Joe]


14 thoughts on “Quote of the day—43north

  1. joe:

    i am all done w/ being polite w/ these people.

    i am all for reminding them that if they try to take our guns, we will kill them. flat out, plain and simple. i regard gun confiscation as a deprivation of political liberty and right, and tyranny. in short, the equivalent of a declaration of war. it should be dealt with the same way, and responding to with deadly force. baghdad rules.

    john jay

    • Yes… They are (as a group) getting more and more strident about their demands and creating statistics and facts to support their lame viewpoints.

      When I do answer them, I usually leave a veiled implication that they action won’t be viewed as valid law and therefore could bring about a very difficult situation that will likely complete the rupture of what was American society.

      Always remember that the if thinking Progressives that want to take your guns and enslave you don’t see themselves as having a hand in the actual mechanics of disarming you… That’s for other knuckle draggers that happen to follow orders to take care of. Many of the P’s would probably view a significant body count as a positive result and improvement in the make up of their society.

      • I aim to misbehave if they ever try confiscation. The fact that most military and police will not follow clearly illegal orders and the sheer number of firearms owners and the “significant body count” will be on their side, not ours.

        I am not a lawyer, but I can then see the tribunals and trials for their undermining the Constitution, treason, denial of civil rights under the color of law, and other abuses of power that will result in them wishing they were among the dead. If we are ever forced to do a reset for the nation, people like me will make sure that those who started it will be a forgotten memory.

        So, yes, I am getting strident, too. They took off the gloves with this nonsense about the bogus infringing terrorist watch list and the calls for forced disarmament (looking at you NYT, Feinstein, and the POTUS). Anyone who wrongly calls for my disarmament is my enemy.

      • We are as far from widespread confiscation as we have been in 25 years. The current confiscation rhetoric is the result of them losing so badly in the court of public opinion.

        Mock them and enjoy the show. Don’t get too wound up about it.

        • That’s been pretty much my take. Their best chance, as you say, was 20-30 years ago.

          I just worry about what they’ll do when it finally dawns on them that their magical utopia is a pipe dream.

          This guy, 43north? Kinda scares me. I went through his little ‘proposal’. I think he managed to violate just about EVERY amendment in the Bill of Rights, except for the 3rd. Maybe. Someone like that, so eager to get his way that he pisses all over the protections that keep him free? Well… someone like that bears careful watching. Just in case.

  2. “The danger of these guns, which can all be traced to some current or long-ago military arm, is too great.”

    For once, an entirely factual statement from an anti libertarian. Guns are generally martial in origin, and they represent an unacceptable danger to would-be tyrants.

    “The fact that most military and police will not follow clearly illegal orders…”

    We all know of the massive purge of upper level military personnel by Obama. I believe that in ten years you will scarcely recognize our military and most police departments. Your statement as “fact” that military and police will not follow clearly illegal orders might just barely be true today, in places here and there. Next year, or five years from now I very much doubt it. That very “problem”, I have no doubt, is being worked on with some vigor, and that work will continue regardless of the next election.

    We keep using that word, “fact” but I don’t think it means what you think it means. At best in this case I’d call it “hope”.

  3. “You takin’ point, there, Hoss?”
    “You OK with murdering people who say NO?”
    “How many people are you willing to have your obedient government minions kill off in order to enforce this order? Please be specific, and explain why the number isn’t higher or lower.”
    “And after that happens, when a pair of large, strong young men show up to rape and murder you / your wife / daughter / dog, how do you plan on stopping them?”
    “Why do you expect this program of yours to be more successful than the prohibition on drugs, when drugs are consumables that must be constantly made, distributed, and sold?”

    Just a few of the possible replies to people pushing that agenda.

    • Well, for one, the gubmint doesn’t really want the flow of drugs stopped. No way… WAY too much tax free bribe money to be made. And those “civil forfeiture” laws, man they don’t even have to convict you. “Hey dude, nice Corvette”. “What’s that I smell”? “I ‘think’ you have marijuana in there”. “Step out of the car and hand me the keys, NOW!” “Under arrest”? “No, no need for that”. “We”ll tell the DMV about the title change”. “You have a nice day now, and a nice walk home”… Good luck getting your car back. 🙁

      That’s a straw argument though. I think the answer to your question is about 95% of the WORLD’S population according to UN Agenda 21 and 2030. They are not kidding. If mass starvation doesn’t do it, they’ll release one of their weaponized viruses. Ebola may have been a direct “first attempt”, but it fizzled (at least so far). Perhaps they’ll come up with a bug that really DOES create zombies. Wouldn’t that be fun? 🙂

      (slightly off topic, but germane)
      I found myself dismayed, appalled, and very disappointed that the national guard obeyed the “disarm” orders during the Katrina debacle. But, the public consternation after it was done might effect a different outcome “next time”. One can only hope.

      I read an article about o’zero being the best gun salesman in history yesterday. I personally hope he’s ‘aaawll’ choked up about it. But one of the commenters suggested that he thought it was deliberate, that he (o’zero) was just adding wood to the fire of the race/religious war he’s been trying to get started here. With the extra firearms the conflagration would be just that much bigger and bloodier. (Assuming he succeeds in getting a widespread civil war going). To this point the people of this country have shown remarkable restraint in the face of “astroturf” riots, and mentally ill/Jihadi shootings in “gun free” zones, plus the overt villainization of the police and wall-to-wall screeching in the lame stream ‘news’. I wouldn’t put anything past this ‘administration’, though in the end it doesn’t really matter. I’d rather be armed and be able to defend myself than unarmed and dead…

      • I think a lot of gunnies have some idea just how bad crossing that red line in the sand will be, and are extremely reluctant to cross it. But, when push comes to shove, one things rural folk of northern European descent (culturally, if not ethnically) can do is kill people in large numbers very quickly. When the gloves come off, things go from zero to bloody bad in a hurry.

        Some may laugh at the delusions of the knuckle-dragging bitter-clingers, but consider: the Beslan massacre involved more than thirty very heavily armed Chechens willing to die for their cause, and they killed off somewhat over 300 people, slightly more than ten dead for each terrorist who ended up taking a dirt nap.
        Compare that to Anders Breivik: one man, essentially working alone, killed 77, injured more than 300, and lived through it.
        Scary thought: if the governments of Europe don’t get their collective shit together soon and get with the nationalist movement, then the ultra-nationalists might take over, and Breivik will be all but sainted by them. How will that whole mass immigration thing work out then, eh? How will that look when it lands here in the US?

        That’s not a happy thought, nor something I’m looking forward to.

  4. Please keep in mind that this sort of talk, of mass confiscation of weapons, usually comes from people who equate talk with action. Talking about something is as good as actually doing it.

    We saw some examples recently of how this plays out — e.g. the screeching university professor at a demonstration, trying to eject an unsympathetic reporter, who kept saying that she needed some “muscle” here. (Her talkety-talk was, for once, not enough.)

    The thing is, talking IS as good as doing… if we let them persuade us. The best way to win a war, Sun Tzu taught us, is to persuade the enemy to lay down his weapons without fighting. They will have their victories, but let us not hand them any.

  5. As a matter of international law, he’s wrong about the shotguns: They were never banned for use in war. The Germans tried to make that argument in WWI, that shotguns should be banned under the earlier Hague Conventions, but they failed. The main reason shotguns aren’t commonly used in a military context except under special circumstances is because of their limited range.

    • Yeah, I kinda wondered about that. Shotguns saw use in WWI due to their usefulness in trench warfare, and IIRC infantry units WILL carry shotguns in urban environments. But they’re a strictly close-quarters weapon.

  6. 1) NO handguns
    2) NO rifles
    3) NO shotguns
    4) NO brains
    “People get their food from the grocery store”
    My grocery store doesn’t carry squirrel.

  7. No. 3 All the lead used with firearms was on the planet already, so I do not see how moving it around a little is a big issue.

Comments are closed.