Paramilitary Extremists Riot

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by TexasPatriot, Dec 16, 2010.

  1. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    BOSTON, April 20 - National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed on April 19th by elements of a para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimated that 72 were killed and more than 20 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.

    Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement. Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices.

    The governor, who described the group's organizers as "criminals," issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government's efforts to secure law and order.

    The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons. Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early April between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms. One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that "none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned their weapons over voluntarily."

    "Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government's plans.

    During a tense standoff in Lexington's town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists. Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.

    Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces overmatched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat.

    Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor has also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops. Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as "ringleaders" of the extremist faction, remain at large.
     
  2. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0

  3. fireguy

    fireguy New Member

    1,853
    0
    0
    It could come to pass, brother. Pray it doesn't
    Edit: I guess this didn't come off as I thought it would. I got a pm.

    Yes I get that this based on the beginning of the Revolutionary War.
    It is also written in a style that it could be applied to modern day, i.e. next April.
    It's focus on a gun grab is very current in that there is a group of modern large city mayors who have made it a focus to limit the public's right to bear arms.
    Clear enough?
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2010
  4. dewey

    dewey New Member

    73
    0
    0
    I got a quarter way through it and thought "Oh, Crap".
    Halfway through, it started to sound familiar.
    That was a good take on a classic.
     
  5. Bigcountry02

    Bigcountry02 Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup Supporter

    7,232
    38
    48
  6. collegekid20

    collegekid20 New Member

    207
    0
    0
    Awesome post. Now, how would we feel if that happened today to tha masachussets national guard?
     
  7. gatopardo

    gatopardo New Member

    360
    0
    0
    Considering

    Would be the hell of a morning breaking news pal.

    Considering the actual government is fully local and popularly elected, the deed might not be as popular as "back in the days"

    However in a movie, the plot is perfectly entertaining. Matt Damon can play Paul Revere, Samuel Adams is Brad Pitt and John Hancock is Leonardo Dicaprio. Hell of a movie it would be.
     
  8. Dzscubie

    Dzscubie New Member

    2,508
    0
    0

    I disagree that this could happen today. First they did not have the protection of the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment and hate the police as much as you want but they would not be able to get together a useable force to violate the Constitution by trying to seize weapons. I know, I know those of you that see a conspiracy in every action of the police will say it has happened. Well, almost all of those incidents that have been brought up in this forum have been taken for some reason other than just to seize weapons. A possible threat, mental evaluation, or a plethora of other reasons. Do individual organizations want to ban all guns … you bet you’re a** they do BUT I still don’t see the country as a whole trying to confiscate our weapons. Can I see them try to regulate the guns… yes but not seize. But this is just my opinion and it and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee.
     
  9. JTJ

    JTJ Well-Known Member Supporter

    9,545
    147
    63
    Regular police would not be used. Probably not the National Guard either. ATF very likely. UN troops a high possibility as the ban and confiscation would be the result of a UN treaty. We are being led into a One World Government and no one will be allowed to keep weapons.
    Hitler called in all weapons. They were collected, registered, serviced and returned in good working order. He then made a second call and almost everybody turned in their weapons. They did not get them back.
     
  10. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    I'm sure the good people in California, Louisiana, DC, among others, will be glad to hear that their guns weren't actually confiscated, but...ummmm....borrowed? Glad that was cleared up finally
     
  11. k2000k

    k2000k New Member

    79
    0
    0
    I am tired of this UN b.s. The probability of UN troops being used is next to nothing, why would the most powerful nation in the world submit itself to the UN? I mean honestly think about it, yes certain individuals in this society have a 'unhealthy' fetish for this concept of being citizens of the world. But not even Obama, yes I said it, Obama, would submit to the UN. This makes me frustrated because hyperbole like this only makes us look crazy and makes it much harder for us to argue against the 'real' threats to our constitutional rights. The idea of goose stepping UN soldiers might tickle the imagination, but honestly, it isn't going to happen. Look to you local legislator and judge, thats where our 2nd amendment rights are won or lost.
     
  12. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    Perhaps you are correct...right up to the point when we suffer a massive economic melt-down, or terrorist attacks.Then there is rioting and mass civil unrest across the nation. Which precedes martial law.This is imposed by who? Our own combat arms units that are stationed overseas? Or perhaps the one brought back and trained to deal with this eventuality here? Or maybe order will be restored by UN Peace Keepers...The Second Amendment is NOT won or lost in the courts...it is a birthright.
     
  13. JTJ

    JTJ Well-Known Member Supporter

    9,545
    147
    63
    It has already started. Obama subjected our human rights record to the UN for review and condemnation. Next will be subjecting our citizens to the authority of the World Court. It will be a one step at a time process of giving up our National Sovereignty to the UN. Climate Change is being used to give the UN taxing powers. The next big push will be over population as more people mean more polution and consumption of resources. You can remain one of the Ostrich People if you wish but I have probably been around a lot longer than you and have seen the changes in our society. It is not encouraging.
     
  14. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    I came into this world on October 1, 1962....48 years ago.I have seen a change or twoand more than one liberty lost into the depths. I see the UN moving on us soon. Surprisingly, there are those that are able to actually witness the major moves taking place and still refuse to believe the facts.I often wonder what sort of intellect it requires to be able to develop and maintain such a totally screwed up ideology.
     
  15. amoroque

    amoroque New Member

    1,229
    0
    0
    Great Article, thanks for sharing!
     
  16. gatopardo

    gatopardo New Member

    360
    0
    0
    we own it


    I thought we owned the UN, is in NY right? ;)
     
  17. 7point62

    7point62 Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    2,188
    0
    0
    "Mr and Mrs America, turn them all in..." -- Diane Feinstein

    I'm waiting for Texas to secede. Then I'll move there.
     
  18. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    I wish...But, alas,it is sovereign soil that we allowed to be carved out of our nation.
     
  19. TexasPatriot

    TexasPatriot New Member

    79
    0
    0
    I see a troubling trend evolving here. The UN has nothing to do with the posting. It is obviously about the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution. It was about excessive tyranny imposed by an out of control government. Excessive taxation, regulation, etc...

    If you turn to the Declaration Of Independence and read the grievances notated by the people of America, you will see a parallel transformation taking shape today in contemporary America. The foundation of my predictions, determinations, et al...

    History Repeating Itself
     
  20. collegekid20

    collegekid20 New Member

    207
    0
    0
    I really don't se why people would think the UN would try to impose martial la on us. From what country would they get troops? Whenever they launch any real operation of world significance they rely mostly on US troops and support. Not to mention the fact that we have zoo many gangs and criminals in this country that the police can't control them, what makes you think they will submit to a bunch of poorly armed foreigners? Sorry to get off topic but wow.