Professional Soldiers ģ

Professional Soldiers ģ (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Soapbox (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=93)
-   -   America's Second Civil War (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52035)

Peregrino 03-27-2017 11:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper (Post 625612)
It occurs to me that carrying a firearm in public is pretty easy.

Being able to employ it effectively (and the will to), especially when someone is shooting back at you is a much different (and more difficult) proposition.

Most people who carry have little, if any training beyond the minimums. There might be a vet or two among them, but if so, probably not infantry or SF.

The anarchists are not above shooting the sheeple (or their own), and blaming it on the other side.
Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

In their enthusiasm, the "Useful Idiots" always forget to read the fine print. Martyrdom is something that happens to somebody else - ignoring the fact that the people pulling their strings aren't anywhere near the front lines.

bblhead672 03-27-2017 13:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peregrino (Post 625614)
In their enthusiasm, the "Useful Idiots" always forget to read the fine print. Martyrdom is something that happens to somebody else - ignoring the fact that the people pulling their strings aren't anywhere near the front lines.

Agreed...and apparently the members of the "John Brown Gun Club" failed to read the entirety of Mr. Brown's story to the part where he was hanged.

Team Sergeant 03-27-2017 14:50

And it would appear that if called upon to "haul-ass" to a firefight, some of them would need to make at least 3-4 trips....... :munchin

PSM 03-27-2017 16:00

Seems like that could be considered brandishing (not that there's anything wrong with that). I'm sure the LEOs will use the same restrained enforcement when Trump supporters protect their rallies.

Pat

Team Sergeant 03-27-2017 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSM (Post 625627)
Seems like that could be considered brandishing (not that there's anything wrong with that). I'm sure the LEOs will use the same restrained enforcement when Trump supporters protect their rallies.

Pat

Brandishing only applies to older white males. I'm surprised you didn't read that right in Arizona's gun laws......... :munchin

rsdengler 03-29-2017 11:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paslode (Post 625609)
Many of those pictured could use some PT.

LOL....And a Month of fasting......:munchin

DJ Urbanovsky 03-29-2017 12:11

That's being generous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paslode (Post 625609)
Many of those pictured could use some PT.


Paslode 03-29-2017 17:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ Urbanovsky (Post 625712)
That's being generous.

Well, most of those kids look like they exercise with a Xbox controller in one hand and a BigGulp in the other hand.

I really like the chick that had the AR with the long gun scope!

tonyz 03-29-2017 18:23

Some additional insight into why reasonable compromise now seems nearly impossible. Complete article at link.

THE CIVIL WAR IS HERE
The left doesnít want to secede. It wants to rule.
March 27, 2017 Daniel Greenfield
FrontPage MAG

A civil war has begun.

This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesnít want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesnít control.

The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions donít accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left.

It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning.

It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now itís for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over.

It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become ďpatrioticĒ.

There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, thatís not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; itís treason.

After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions.

This isnít just hypocrisy. Thatís a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology.

Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesnít just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology.

Thatís why compromise has become impossible.

Our system of government was designed to allow different groups to negotiate their differences. But those differences were supposed to be based around finding shared interests. The most profound of these shared interests was that of a common country based around certain civilizational values. The left has replaced these Founding ideas with radically different notions and principles. It has rejected the primary importance of the country. As a result it shares little in the way of interests or values.

Instead it has retreated to cultural urban and suburban enclaves where it has centralized tremendous amounts of power while disregarding the interests and values of most of the country. If it considers them at all, it is convinced that they will shortly disappear to be replaced by compliant immigrants and college indoctrinated leftists who will form a permanent demographic majority for its agenda.

But it couldnít wait that long because it is animated by the conviction that enforcing its ideas is urgent and inevitable. And so it turned what had been a hidden transition into an open break.

In the hidden transition, its authority figures had hijacked the law and every political office they held to pursue their ideological agenda. The left had used its vast cultural power to manufacture a consensus that was slowly transitioning the country from American values to its values and agendas. The right had proven largely impotent in the face of a program which corrupted and subverted from within.

The left was enormously successful in this regard. It was so successful that it lost all sense of proportion and decided to be open about its views and to launch a political power struggle after losing an election.

The Democrats were no longer being slowly injected with leftist ideology. Instead the left openly took over and demanded allegiance to open borders, identity politics and environmental fanaticism. The exodus of voters wiped out the Democrats across much of what the left deemed flyover country.

The left responded to democratic defeats by retreating deeper into undemocratic institutions, whether it was the bureaucracy or the corporate media, while doubling down on its political radicalism. It is now openly defying the outcome of a national election using a coalition of bureaucrats, corporations, unelected officials, celebrities and reporters that are based out of its cultural and political enclaves.

It has responded to a lost election by constructing sanctuary cities and states thereby turning a cultural and ideological secession into a legal secession. But while secessionists want to be left alone authoritarians want everyone to follow their laws. The left is an authoritarian movement that wants total compliance with its dictates with severe punishments for those who disobey.

The left describes its actions as principled. But more accurately they are ideological. Officials at various levels of government have rejected the authority of the President of the United States, of Congress and of the Constitution because those are at odds with their radical ideology. Judges have cloaked this rejection in law. Mayors and governors are not even pretending that their actions are lawful.

The choices of this civil war are painfully clear.

We can have a system of government based around the Constitution with democratically elected representatives. Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the left in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice.

But we cannot have both.

Some civil wars happen when a political conflict canít be resolved at the political level. The really bad ones happen when an irresolvable political conflict combines with an irresolvable cultural conflict.

That is what we have now.

<snip>

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2661...iel-greenfield

ddoering 03-29-2017 18:28

When do we start shooting?

Badger52 03-29-2017 19:16

Quote:

Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the right in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice.
Hell, in mid-1864 these well-funded carpetbaggers would've been Republicans, able to suspend the Constitution, perform ethnic cleansing, confiscate property, and declare martial law in friendly states in order to jail political opponents. Frankly, only the color of the statist of the moment has changed. What goes around comes around sometimes...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddoering (Post 625725)
When do we start shooting?

but this time it might be RH twist.
:cool:

bubba 03-29-2017 19:17

"It's too late to work within the system, and too early to start shooting the bastards." - Claire Wolfe

Badger52 03-29-2017 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubba (Post 625727)
"It's too late to work within the system, and too early to start shooting the bastards." - Claire Wolfe

I think she said that in 1996 or so; gosh we've been accomodating.

SC Pete 04-03-2017 14:06

Once again Tonyz is right on the mark. The new left really thinks that it is all going their way. Could be. But there are a lot of "Quiet Professionals" of all stripes, in all sorts of positions who keep their politics to themselves. A monkey wrench dropped in the gears at the right time will do more damage than 100 gun toting patriots. It's a new age, and the bunker and guns in the hills mentality is obsolete. Think "drone", and "cyber war". Unless there is a EMT killshot, US UW won't be settled with guns. Although the first phases will be. And as my earlier post this thread pointed out, revos are more about score settling than ideology.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19.


Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ģ