Looks like its fixin to get for real boys and girls.

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Ghost1958, Jul 5, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    Well, we aren't talking about one city! Or even two or thee or four! Or it being localized! We are talking about widespread violence all over the country! Planned, deliberate, well-funded, well-armed and well-orchestrated! A literal army of anarchist terrorists all across the nation, all at once.

    BUT ... If Trump were to single out one city like Portland he certainly could. Just like Eisenhower did. Right, wrong, or sideways, he could. The text in the Act says nothing about civil liberties, not one word ... it says CIVIL UNREST ... PERIOD.

    But Trump is not going to do it just because of what has been going on in Portland, Seattle, Chicago, NYC or elsewhere ... if he was going to he already would have done it.

    Local citizenry are incapable of "sweeping up" diddly-squat simply because they lack the authority to arrest diddly-squat. All local citizenry are capable of doing is killing people ... and going to prison for 20 years or life for their trouble ... unless their personal life is threatened AND THEY CAN PROVE IT. They can band together with their weapons, puff out their chests and look mean and threatening and hope they scare away the bad guys ... but that is about all they can do ... and to make it worse the terrorists know it ... and so do the citizenry. And if their governor and/or mayor and the DA are supporting the terrorists, and the terrorists start shooting, those citizenry are in deep doo-doo if they use a gun! Unless any such citizen wants to go to prison he/she had damned well better have video footage proving their life was in danger ... and it is almost impossible to accomplish that while running a gun ... otherwise they will end up just like Kyle Rittenhouse but without the supporting videos Kyle has in his defense. You might not like that, but that's how it is. You can talk about Federalist three-legged stools all you want, but the fact is that an armed citizenry is next to useless in the face of this type of violence.

    I even question if an armed citizenry is effective in modern times against a tyrannical government with a full-blown military at its disposal. This ain't the days of our founding fathers. It is no longer muskets against muskets. It is now semi-auto rifles against full-auto sub-machine guns and assault rifles, light machine guns, 50-caliber machine guns, Abrams tanks and attack helicopters. Our only hope has to be that our military would not cooperate with a tyrannical government but with us instead, but short of that we are pretty much defenseless.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    locutus likes this.
  2. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Meant that the statutes in question were "local," in that they were town/county ordinances and state laws regarding criminality involved by some of the folks assembled. That itself isn't a federal issue; it's a "local" (town, county, state) issue of enforcement of their laws.

    And it is not a national or constitutional law at stake. It's "local" (state) statutes.

    As for "widespread," that brings up the question, then: does the response to the state of Washington's instances of criminality depend on whether there's similar crimes happening in Atlanta, Boston, Kenosha, Denver or elsewhere? Nope. Whether to forcibly send troops into the state of Washington depends strictly on Washington's situation and the justification there. That things are happening elsewhere in some cities isn't really relevant to Washington's situation.

    Take most any of these instances, and it's not like the whole place is burning or falling to lawlessness. It's fairly smaller zones within such towns or cities. Ugly, yes, and in many spots dozens of square blocks "occupied" and messed with. That a few news reports show a few shops going up in flames, or a few places broken into and looted, or a range of assaults happening doesn't, itself, equate to huge portions of such places going down.

    Recent reports from Kenosha (WI), for example, suggest the damage sustained in the days following the mess amounted to ~$12M. In a population of ~100K. Not pocket change, but hardly the whole place burning.

    Anyway. The main point being: it's a small step to martial law, when troops and heavy resources have been forcibly brought upon a community. Every tin-pot dictatorship around the world has done that. So far, largely the U.S. has remained immune from such temptations. Beware. We're not. It can be avoided if we fight such temptations with everything we've got.

    Ask for help. That's all the people in such benighted communities (states) need to do. They need only ask, and I'm sure resources will be made available that'll make many of the criminals involved quake in their boots. And we'll avoid the risk of martial law forcibly imposed upon an unwilling people.


    EDIT: grammar, spelling.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    Ghost1958 likes this.

  3. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    And what if the residents of those communities (states) ask and beg, but their elected officials are adamantly against what their constituents are begging for? Wait four years for the next election while many of those people are killed, their businesses burned and their homes ransacked?

    Once again, I don't know what part of planned, deliberate, well-funded, well-armed and well-orchestrated widespread violence you just seemingly refuse to get.

    As for fighting Trump's decision to use the Insurrection Act, if he makes that decision, you can fight it with all you've got if you want and you will be one of the terrorists ... and you will lose ... maybe your life.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
  4. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Some have had, yes.

    If the vast majority of people of such communities were pleading so loudly, surely the media would be crowing that from the rooftops. They're not. Because it's not happening.

    No prizes to guessing why. It's basically what they prefer. Their own control over their own problems, without being dictated to and having their LE effectively nationalized.


    Got it.

    All they need do is ask.

    Or, if being muzzled and intimidated, all they need to is find some stellar legal group willing to take on a $100B class-action lawsuit on behalf of communities in a state to sue the "leadership" into getting the job done right. Haven't heard of any such thing, either.

    All they need do is ask. Pretty darned simple.
     
    Ghost1958 likes this.
  5. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    The Fake News media would report no such thing ... they would do all in their power to cover it up because it wouldn't fit their Leftist / Marxist narrative.

    I am going to stop arguing with you because it is going absolutely nowhere and is utterly pointless. I will just wait to see what happens. All I'm going to say in parting is that should Trump determine the need (not want) to invoke the Insurrection Act, there isn't a blessed thing you can do about it and I will support his decision 500%.
     
  6. Bigcat

    Bigcat Well-Known Member

    3,235
    2,745
    113
    Am pleased to see the level of discourse has improved...
    Even so I am not a Moderator here but as a long time and I hope, somewhat respected member ....let me say you both make quality points and perhaps this is the time to agree to disagree in mutual friendship and respect. :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    locutus and G66enigma like this.
  7. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Don't want to do anything about it, myself. I'm not there. I'm not them.

    But a people should be able to have a say in how they want their self-governance to occur, instead of having God-knows-what forcibly crammed down their throats.

    Frankly, it's a key pillar on which this republican experiment in governance stands. Representative republican self-governance. Not imposition by force from the outside.

    And by the way: this is debate and dialog. Not pointless arguing. It's about the issues in question, and the threats (pro and con) of certain choices.


    The grand march toward authoritarianism continues. Brick by brick, it's being erected. Each little step toward forcible everything is one step closer to all those things that are anathema to a free people. Would it happen just because of this one act, if forced upon every community in every state experiencing some rioting? Probably not. But the American people are being cowed into accepting that force from outside their communities is not only tolerable but preferable. That's a dire threat in the long run without any good solutions. If we allow it.

    If individuals are so all-fired interested in their own properties and lives, then they bloody well need to arm themselves, get competent and capable, and stand post over their shops, homes, families. And they'd better learn to improve their odds through group training.

    'Cause, in the end, ten thousand towns and cities "occupied" by gangs and roving, marauding anarchists is a problem that isn't going to be put down by force that isn't behind every bush; and that's only going to occur when the people in such communities pull the finger out and finally dare to work on their own behalf for their own daily security.

    Eject or bury the gangs and nefarious elements in their communities; rise up to defy "marchers" when such threaten violence; put down the violent if they come out of their holes.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    Ghost1958 and Bigcat like this.
  8. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    Thank you bluez. I think I just did. If not, I hereby agree to disagree with G66 ... and refuse to argue with him any longer. We will just have to wait and see what happens. All I know is that Trump has publicly indicated what he will do in the face of widespread violence if he wins the election and that the man does not bluff, and that I support him 500%. The man says what he means and means what he says.

    I suppose that if he does use the Insurrection Act many will go insane with an apoplectic fit and run down the streets butt naked ranting and raving with arms flailing and their hair on fire ... and that's how we will know who is on the Left. :);):)
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    Bigcat likes this.
  9. locutus

    locutus Well-Known Member Supporter

    22,420
    14,097
    113
    One thing to keep in mind when discussing so-called "local control."

    Past experiences teaches us that Vigilantes are even worse than martial law.

    Vigilantism, no matter how seemingly justified at one particular moment, will inevitably and very quickly devolve into things like the KKK and neo-nazism.
     
    W.T. Sherman and manta like this.
  10. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Individuals standing up at their own homes and along their own streets (as they're out and about) need not devolve into "vigilantism."

    I engage in my own security daily. Have for decades. Many people near me do the same, and there's no way we're going to tolerate violent felonies to be perpetrated upon us or right in front of us without having something to say about how it ends. That's not vigilantism; that's halting violence that explodes before us, helping to save lives on the instant they're threatened.

    Attempting to become a "policing force" outside the rule of law is an utterly different thing. Absolutely, history shows that all too frequently "forces" that deem themselves outside the law end up acting like it. Yet another reason an exceptionally well-armed general citizenry is so vital.
     
  11. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Huh?

    Can't recall anyone speaking of acting the part of a violent felon by rising up to forcibly deny such lawful LE resources being brought in to quell such violence.

    That's the sort of crap the anarchists and violent felons in some cities are doing now.

    The self-proclaimed vigilantes seeking to "make a name" for themselves? I can easily see such people operating outside the law and going after such lawful resources brought to bring the violent to justice.

    The upstanding, though? Not being claimed as something they'd do.
     
  12. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    It has. Refreshing.
     
  13. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    4,892
    5,467
    113
    Nothing would be worse than martial law.
    The citizenry has a right to be armed and protect themselves and their property.
    Militia were wound into the fabric of this nation long before a police force existed or a standing army authorized .
    Nothing vigilante about it.

    In states or cities where gov wont, or wont because they cant, mostly cant, control protests that are turning violent the people have a right to protect themselves
     
  14. sheriffjohn

    sheriffjohn Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,035
    3,822
    113
    Not everyone with a gun is a good guy. Witness the growing number of "protesters" openly armed lately. Just as flood-prone farmers on both sides of a river each build their levees higher, so does the bi-lateral escalation of shows of force. Anyone can wear a shirt with "Security" written on it as some "protesters" have chosen to do. Obama's election emboldened resistance to law enforcement by some elements of society. This is not going to end any time soon.
     
  15. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    I agree. And what many just DO NOT UNDERSTAND is that we ARE ENGAGED IN A WAR. And I do not mean figuratively. Most people have NO IDEA how powerful, entrenched, and old what we currently refer to as "the deep state" really is. I assure you all that it is FAR more and FAR bigger and FAR more powerful than just a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats within our own government. They (the true deep state) pretty much created BLM and Antifa. But the current violence from BLM/Antifa is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING like what you are likely to see if Trump wins the election. Just in case I'm confusing people, I am referring to the same powers that did 9/11 to further their agenda (just as a rather insignificant example of the kinds of things you could expect if Trump wins the election) ... if that potential violent response is unleashed, you will be seeing far more than just a few thugs shooting people, burning businesses and vandalizing property.

    This is a war because Trump is their worst nightmare. If he wins they are afraid of a "Trump dynasty" happening, with his son following him and his daughter following his son/s.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    Bigcat likes this.
  16. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Yup.

    The trick is going to be weeding-out of the nefarious elements. Hard to do unless witnessing them attempting something, or caught red-handed.

    Goes far beyond mere gatherings and "rioting," which of course is what's garnering all the headlines these days.

    Gets to the core of people protecting their homes and daily lives, businesses, properties. Isn't going to be easily accomplished with merely the paid help, even if additional resources are partially and temporarily supplied from elsewhere (which will cost, as well). It's going to have to come from the people living there, to a large extent, if it's going to have any staying power.

    Time to put up or be put up against the wall, really. People need to choose what sort of communities they're going to make for themselves. Are they going to allow violent elements to continue to grow in strength and boldness, or are they going to stand up and help solve this problem forcibly if needed and for the long haul. Not going to be easy, for many. But it's a choice that will be made, willing or not.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2020
    Bigcat likes this.
  17. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    Going to prison for using a gun isn't easy. And if you are in a liberal-run state that is exactly what will happen unless you have overwhelming evidence to support your actions. Almost everywhere in the country it is illegal to use deadly force unless your life is being threatened ... you cannot use it merely to protect your property. So go ahead, "stand up", and likely spend considerable time behind bars for your trouble. The "paid help" is there for a reason.
     
  18. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,206
    3,058
    113
    Yes, they are. As many as might exist in a given community.

    Got to survive long enough for them to matter, though. Generally rare to find one on one's shoulder, the moment things blow sideways. No real way around that.

    And that's not something a lot of folks are capable of (let alone prepared to be) doing.
     
  19. Rancid

    Rancid Well-Known Member Supporter

    870
    524
    93
    It is about time.
     
  20. freefall

    freefall Well-Known Member

    5,162
    4,371
    113
    No one has held his feet to the fire, they've just thrown buckets of shlt at him.
    There's a difference.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.