20 thoughts on “It Can’t Happen Here”

  2. Several days ago, when Governor and Imperator General Cuomo said he didn’t see WHY anyone would need a 10 round clip to ‘take down’ [his term not mine] a deer.

    My thought was that 10 round clips and magazines aren’t for taking down deer, they are for taking down politicians and governments who use terms like ‘taking down’ deer. Guys like Cuomo and Obumble go to the top of the list because they keep saying things like, “…and the citizens don’t need [enter your favorite Right here]”.

    1. 5-10 round magazines are for taking down deer. 20-30 round magazines are for taking down tyrants and thugs.

    1. Idiots like Cuomo say things like the “10 rounds to down a deer” remark because there’s a huge percentage of the sheeple who will buy that “reasoning”. They are too ill informed of their own countries history to understand the simple fact that the second amendment is not about hunting.

      1. Not “just” about hunting. You tell those wackos its not about hunting and they are going to ban guns for hunting or just ban hunting outright.

  4. Those many that scoff at using the 2nd amendment right, as they did when Sharon Angle just happened to mention it still exists, are traitors to this country and should be impeached for not protecting and defending the constitution.

    Instead they would make advocates of citizen rights the crazy criminals.

    1. Exactly!

      I often wish the Founders could be snatched up in Mr. Wells Time Machine, and brought to a Public Library, anywhere in the country. Once there, I’d like to have them read some of our daily news. Or just the front pages from 5 or 6 newspapers, for the last 5 or 6 years.

      And I don’t want them talking to ME, or YOU, or Wayne LaPierre, or Sarah Brady. I want them to draw there own conclusions about what we are.

      I’d love them to see their opinion of the 2nd Amendment issue, and Newtown, and all the recent shootings even the numbers of shootings in Chicago vs Dallas, or L.A. vs…Austin, laid against the fact that many of us have been disarmed by the state and partly by the feds.

      It’s enough to make me start studying physics.

  5. “Fast and Furious” seems like one of those things that “couldn’t happen here.” Damn, where was Eric Holder when Pancho Villa needed him?

    (I think I just came up with the next Doctor Who plot.)

    And sending an ambassador into a war zone without protection? Even Jimmy Carter isn’t that wussy.

  7. the Second Amendment is the ultimate enforcement mechanism

    When has it enforced any limitation on federal power? How did all those terrible things “happen here” when we had the 2nd amendment to protect us?

    1. The 2nd as a counter to federal power is a back stop when all else fails. Short of armed revolt, the threat of armed revolt should be a deterrent against tyranny.

      Back in the 1770s the founding fathers didn’t start with armed revolution, they started with a years long campaign trying to appear to the hearts and minds in the British government. Only when that failed, and the British government answered with further tyranny, did they turn to direct defiance.

      Today we face a failure of the legal means available to turn back tyranny, and threat of losing options to turn back tyranny in the future.

      1. You have to understand, Peter, that when State-shtuppers such as Jim say “an armed populace can’t protect us from tyranny,” they actually mean “we don’t WANT an armed populace to protect us from tyranny”–when it’s THEIR tyranny.

        I have developed something I call the “Statist BS to Clear English” online dictionary, and if you feed into it any posting from Jim, as I’ve been doing in experimental runs, whatever he says basicaally comes down to “Me likey the Statey” or “Submit, tax serfs!” Watch for it on Yahoo soon.

    3. Because, much like the First, it isn’t something one needs until it is already too late to enact.

      The British are both completely disarmed and have both strong “hate crime” speech restrictions and strong libel/slander restrictions on free speech.

      They haven’t elected anyone particularly disastrous. Yet. And the Parlimentary-level checks seem to be holding. But that sort of check actually ends up relying on a very small set of people.

      Even the simplest coup (or ‘consolidation of power’, or ‘change’) is much more complex when both speaking up and firing back have been removed as options.

      Just picture whomever your favorite bogeyman is as Prime Minister. Add an atrocity or two to exploit. Sue andor investigate the most vocal. (Hate, Slander, Libel, Sedition, Incitement, Violent Threats, whatever) “Hey Alex Jones… Hey David Keene…”

    4. When in the course of considering expanding federal power, some will consider the intent of the 2nd without any danger of its use, and limit that federal power expansion. This should include everyone that is supposed to defend and protect our constitution. Sadly it does not.

    5. When gold was discovered in California, several politicians demanded that the mines should all be siezed by the federal government and that the gold should be treated as a public good and go directly into the national treasury. The idea was abandoned because the miners greatly outgunned any possible federal units that could reach the area, and anyone the state could call up for militia duty was already ankle deep in a stream panning for gold. So instead the property and claim system the miners came up with was incorporated into federal law.

      1. “When gold was discovered in California, several politicians demanded that the mines should all be siezed by the federal government and that the gold should be treated as a public good and go directly into the national treasury. The idea was abandoned because the miners greatly outgunned any possible federal units that could reach the area . . . ”

        Jim no doubt sees this incident as “a lost opportunity.”

Comments are closed.