• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Militia group calls for Obama's assassination

Ikari said:
I can understand this. And it is frustrating to see protest turn violent against non-legitimate sources. But the ability to protest and to engage in civil disobedience and even in a bit of the ol' anarchy is necessary.
Click to expand...

I agree with that..... I've protested with the Tea Party, and I don't believe they have gone far enough..... I don't believe a bunch of people standing and talking on a microphone can make much of a difference.... When you're benevolent no one pays attention, and when they do you get mocked...

Maybe they will get the message when 300,000 + gun owners march to DC with riffles and side arms strapped to their backs and waist.

What the **** could anyone do about that? there is not enough military or cops to even attempt to stop a peaceful march such as that...
 
Sietske22 said:
Christian militia calls for Obama

The Christian American Patriots Militia is openly calling for the assassination of President Barack Obama on their Facebook page. The Christian militia calls Obama a “dictator,” and claims the “authority to kill Obama comes from the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution.”

Scumbags.

Arrest them all
Click to expand...

Bar stool insurgents. Punks who are brave in direct proportion to their distance from the enemy.:peace
 
I was telling someone the other day what it was like going to the rifle range with swollen hands and eyes and your lips are still bleeding a little...damn maybe you are right about a lot of stuff APACHERAT. But not everything.
APACHERAT said:
What's different today compared to fifty years ago ?

Fifty years ago you didn't have Columbine shootings but access to firearms was a whole lot easier. No background checks, waiting periods, even a sixteen year old could purchase a box of ammunition. There were more homes with guns in the home. There were no video games and instead after school the activity was football, base ball, playing army and cowboys and Indians. You could actually get hurt playing. You can't get hurt playing the video game "Grand Theft Auto."

When I was in grade school they had "show and tell," and it was common for a class mate to bring his father's war souvenirs from WW ll to show, the German P-08 Luger being the most popular. No body raised an eye brow and Miss Crabapple would say "Show and tell is over. Now Johnny put that pistol in your desk and don't forget to take it home after school or your father will likely give you a spanking."

About twenty five years ago the Marine Corps discovered that new recruits were showing up and have never been in a fist fight in their lives. That todays generation don't know how to fisticuffs. That the Corps had to bring out the boxing gloves to teach maggots how to fisticuff. They know how to cold **** someone on a video game or blow up the jolly green giant but if there's a real fight over a girl they don't use their fist but resort to a gun or knife.
Click to expand...
 
clownboy said:
It does indeed. Have you by chance read the document?
Click to expand...

I did. It states some of our rights explicitly in order to absolutely forbid government intervention in their free exercise. But it does not invent the right.
 
Ikari said:
No, it's not. We did not impeach King George, we overthrew him through violent rebellion. The very birth of our Republic betrays your opinion.
Click to expand...

We didn't "overthrow" anybody. King George III remained the king of England for quite some time. We simply were enough of a pain in the ass that the Brits decided we weren't worth the trouble.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I agree with that..... I've protested with the Tea Party, and I don't believe they have gone far enough..... I don't believe a bunch of people standing and talking on a microphone can make much of a difference.... When you're benevolent no one pays attention, and when they do you get mocked...

Maybe they will get the message when 300,000 + gun owners march to DC with riffles and side arms strapped to their backs and waist.

What the **** could anyone do about that? there is not enough military or cops to even attempt to stop a peaceful march such as that...
Click to expand...

You might want to take a look at the Whiskey Rebellion. Or the Bonus Army.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
I did. It states some of our rights explicitly in order to absolutely forbid government intervention in their free exercise. But it does not invent the right.
Click to expand...

You're playing with semantics. Again you didn't have the right before the Constitution and you have it after.
 
clownboy said:
You didn't have it before the Constitution but you did after. Yes, it did indeed create those rights. At least in reality.
Click to expand...

No, in reality we always had the right. That's why even without the English government stating we had the right to bear arms, we had the right to bear arms. The first thing they tried to do was take the arms.

Now, if you want to say that revolution is a huge throw of the dice, that once you destroy the ruling structure any jerk with enough guns can take charge and could use force against your free exercise of rights, that you do not necessarily know what you'll get on the other side of the revolution; all these things would be true. Revolt is a dangerous deal and that is why it remains the LAST action. But it remains proper tool of the People and in order to preserve the Free State, in order to secure the blessings of liberty to yourself and posterity; the People need access to the tools and means of revolt.
 
clownboy said:
You're playing with semantics. Again you didn't have the right before the Constitution and you have it after.
Click to expand...

I 100% had (if I were alive) the right to keep and bear arms before the Constitution, and I'll have the right after the Constitution.
 
Kobie said:
So go ahead. You first.
Click to expand...

Do what?

Sorry, I don't kill people unless they put guns in my face...

Unlike you "the dude" my goal isn't intimidation and murder.
 
Kobie said:
We didn't "overthrow" anybody. King George III remained the king of England for quite some time. We simply were enough of a pain in the ass that the Brits decided we weren't worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

We threw him out of the colonies through armed, violent rebellion. No matter how you try to color that, the facts are the facts.
 
Sietske22 said:
Christian militia calls for Obama

The Christian American Patriots Militia is openly calling for the assassination of President Barack Obama on their Facebook page. The Christian militia calls Obama a “dictator,” and claims the “authority to kill Obama comes from the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution.”

Scumbags.

Arrest them all
Click to expand...

Im not saying kill the guy but a lot of the decisions he and his administration have made definitely constitutes impeachment at least, jail time as an extreme.
 
Sietske22 said:
The Christian American Patriots Militia is openly calling
Click to expand...

Never met anyone named Everest. Chances are that the person with that name exists only in unhealthy head liberals who are ready for any meanness, just to spite the Republicans.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Do what?

Sorry, I don't kill people unless they put guns in my face...

Unlike you "the dude" my goal isn't intimidation and murder.
Click to expand...

LOLWUT. My goal is "intimidation and murder"? OK, I'll bite. To what exactly are you referring?
 
Ikari said:
I 100% had (if I were alive) the right to keep and bear arms before the Constitution, and I'll have the right after the Constitution.
Click to expand...

No, they had no such right. And if the governors at the time chose to remove all private arms they would have the grant to do so. Rights are not something you just decide in your mind that you possess. There must be common agreement with the rest of society or you're just the delusional second cousin of a red headed stepchild making **** up.
 
loader said:
Never met anyone named Everest. Chances are that the person with that name exists only in unhealthy head liberals who are ready for any meanness, just to spite the Republicans.
Click to expand...

So you're claiming that "liberals" just made this guy up. And your evidence is that "you've never met anyone named Everest."

This thread keeps getting better and better.
 
Lursa said:
LOL

It's pretty tough to take out POTUS, you think they'll manage both?

Like I said, they dont really seem bright enough, period.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. I have seen it many times in movies. :mrgreen:
 
Mr.Nick said:
Do you know why the USSR never even considered a land invasion of the United States? it wasn't our military...
Click to expand...

And it wasn't just that we were armed either. It's a hard land mass to take. Heck, we haven't even totally managed it.
 
clownboy said:
No, they had no such right. And if the governors at the time chose to remove all private arms they would have the grant to do so. Rights are not something you just decide in your mind that you possess. There must be common agreement with the rest of society or you're just the delusional second cousin of a red headed stepchild making **** up.
Click to expand...

Wow, no need to go off the deep end with the ad homs there. Yes, force can be used against the exercise of rights, this is true. This doesn't mean the right doesn't exist, it merely means you live in treason and tyranny and that you are justified in revolt. Nothing more. Without rights, there is no justification for fighting against oppression.
 
clownboy said:
No and yes. It maintains the ability of the People to revolt, but once they begin said revolt the Constitution that guarantees that right is gone.
Click to expand...

How does embracing the Bill of Rights void it???? you're assuming such an act would be a Coup...

In what universe does protecting the Bill of Rights turn it into a coup, and how does such an act "change" the Bill of Rights considering the Second Amendment was designed for such an act?
 
Well, there is freedom of speech and there are death threats. The posts should have the secret service sufficiently up their ass for quite a while.

When I think of revolution and such....folks have to remember that even with our forefathers, their were consequences to their actions. If that was a call for revolution, then they should be prepared for the truckload of consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom