What is your breaking point for a Revolution?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Mr H

    Banana'd
    We know the ultimate goal is a completely "benevolent" totalitarian model, with a central economic function.

    But, in order to achieve that, the populations must be steered in such a way that the people will welcome their new Secular Progressive overlords.

    How to do that? Turn everything we've known to complete and utter dishevelment, and have a new program ready to roll out.

    Some problems, though... In order to control an otherwise free population, you have to 1) disarm them, 2) make them suffer economically, 3) make them dependent, and 4) provide just above subsistence level care... all in the guise of a free-choice system.

    Our system is well on the way to that, IMO. They just can't quite seem to get over the hump, though, because people here still love and remember freedom, and are starting to see through the veneer.

    This is where we need to be most vigilant. Informing people that it doesn't have to go that route.
     

    Half-cocked

    Senior Meatbag
    Mar 14, 2006
    23,937
    We know the ultimate goal is a completely "benevolent" totalitarian model, with a central economic function.

    But, in order to achieve that, the populations must be steered in such a way that the people will welcome their new Secular Progressive overlords.

    How to do that? Turn everything we've known to complete and utter dishevelment, and have a new program ready to roll out.

    One problem, though... In order to control an otherwise free population, you have to 1) disarm them, 2) make them suffer economically, 3) make them dependent, and 4) provide just above subsistence level care... all in the guise of a free-choice system.

    Also known as "slavery".

    But hey, it built the pyramids.
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    With the way Obama and the Dems are going I keep thinking back tot he stories of Communist Russia right before their collapse. Bread lines and such substitute bread lines for entitlements and then the country would be ripe for a revolution. All you need is a charismatic leader that can get his message across that only hard work and striving to be better today than you were yesterday. But once the entitlements fall the US population will be in free fall and ripe for any smooth talking politician. Only at that time will a "revolution/Civil war" be a real threat.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    If the US falls there will be no recovery. It was largely by comparision to the west that the lie of socialism was exposed. Without that the new dark ages will be very long and very dark..

    The fall is not recoverable... not in 10 generations. Once that is understood the fall can be averted. But not by much.

    Even liberals will get a clue. .. just not in time..

    We need them to get a clue now.... start by pointing out that we are prepared to outlast them..;)
     

    jsm7977

    Member
    Nov 2, 2013
    67
    IDK if we will ever reach that point for 2 reasons that jump to mind first. One being are we as a society nowadays EVEN CAPABLE of joining together in numbers large enough to even make a dent and be willing to make an ultimate sacrifice at the same time? AND... (which is whats been going on for QUITE some time) they slowly chip away at the gun rights little by little all the while saying THIS little bit isn't going to make a difference, so you should stop being a radical extremist about it. When in actuality looking at it year to year that may very well be the case and you wouldn't notice it all that much or theyd give you enough time inbetween their "chips" to get used to it. When in reality, if you were to look at our gun rights as a nation and/or state by state over a mere 50 year period (being the time of the Kennedy and Dr.King assasinations that liberals still make a HUGE DEAL) we have lost ALOT of our gun rights and other right as well any way you slice it. THATS their tactic, steady but slow. Having said that...at some point, we just have to just out and out take the chisel out of their hands so that they CANT chip away at our rights anymore. And the best way is at the polling booth BUT THAT TOO will require a turnout among Republicans like this country has never seen from us similar to the last 2 turn outs of a certain demographic of 93% I believe....
     

    Alutacon

    Desert Storm
    May 22, 2013
    1,136
    Bowie
    So you make no distinction between your country/flag and the government who runs it?

    I love my country, it's the government I fear.

    Also, what is truly dangerous is the notion that folks think words typed on the interwebs is dangerous.

    words typed on the internet are not dangerous at all, but the minds that conceive the words that are typed on the internet....well, that's another story. to accept conceptually that there is a point at which you will take up arms against your country is dangerous, no matter how you spin it. not to mention just plain stupid. this isn't 1776. the simple fact is we are a diverse population. not everyone wants the same things and no one is going to get everything they want. for instance, I am pissed about infringements on gun rights and am trying to do my part to affect positive change. that's my subjective take, but I'm no demagogue. I don't convince myself that people who are anti-gun are wrong. they are as subjectively right in their views as I am in mine. I just need to try to get them to change their views, or get enough people to agree with me so that we can out vote them. that's the way things are done in a democracy. but the idea that you have been out voted would lead to you taking up arms against your country is sickening.

    go get some votes, get the people who agree with you into office and then the "government" will do what you want it to do. elections have consequences. the government isn't evil, it's just that at this particular moment it's in the hands of people who don't like guns.
     

    jpo183

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 20, 2013
    4,116
    in Maryland
    I am pissed about infringements on gun rights and am trying to do my part to affect positive change. that's my subjective take, but I'm no demagogue. I don't convince myself that people who are anti-gun are wrong.


    Well hate to break it to you but you are wrong in your "subjective thinking" as well as your reasoning. They are WRONG and I base this on the COTUS.

    Its very simple right and wrong are black and white when spelled out in COTUS.

    Want to talk marriage thats another story but there is no such thing as subjective thinking or reasoning when speaking about a direct statement in the COTUS.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    words typed on the internet are not dangerous at all, but the minds that conceive the words that are typed on the internet....well, that's another story. to accept conceptually that there is a point at which you will take up arms against your country is dangerous, no matter how you spin it. not to mention just plain stupid. this isn't 1776. the simple fact is we are a diverse population. not everyone wants the same things and no one is going to get everything they want. for instance, I am pissed about infringements on gun rights and am trying to do my part to affect positive change. that's my subjective take, but I'm no demagogue. I don't convince myself that people who are anti-gun are wrong. they are as subjectively right in their views as I am in mine. I just need to try to get them to change their views, or get enough people to agree with me so that we can out vote them. that's the way things are done in a democracy. but the idea that you have been out voted would lead to you taking up arms against your country is sickening.

    go get some votes, get the people who agree with you into office and then the "government" will do what you want it to do. elections have consequences. the government isn't evil, it's just that at this particular moment it's in the hands of people who don't like guns.


    Go learn about limited Government.

    Then learn about electoral fraud.

    Then learn about tranny of the majority.

    Don't know what country to which you think you owe allegence to but my oath is to the constitution not the country not the administration.

    Good luck...
     
    Last edited:

    FoxFirearms

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Dec 13, 2013
    242
    Columbia, MD
    My point would be when the government institutes a complete ban and turn-in. When they start kicking in doors and seizing guns, that's the time to take a firm (and violent, if necessary) stand for our 2nd amendment rights.
     

    montoya32

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jun 16, 2010
    11,311
    Harford Co
    words typed on the internet are not dangerous at all, but the minds that conceive the words that are typed on the internet....well, that's another story. to accept conceptually that there is a point at which you will take up arms against your country is dangerous, no matter how you spin it. not to mention just plain stupid. this isn't 1776. the simple fact is we are a diverse population. not everyone wants the same things and no one is going to get everything they want. for instance, I am pissed about infringements on gun rights and am trying to do my part to affect positive change. that's my subjective take, but I'm no demagogue. I don't convince myself that people who are anti-gun are wrong. they are as subjectively right in their views as I am in mine. I just need to try to get them to change their views, or get enough people to agree with me so that we can out vote them. that's the way things are done in a democracy. but the idea that you have been out voted would lead to you taking up arms against your country is sickening.

    go get some votes, get the people who agree with you into office and then the "government" will do what you want it to do. elections have consequences. the government isn't evil, it's just that at this particular moment it's in the hands of people who don't like guns.

    As a country, we will all be "pushed" around until someone takes a hard stand and says enough is enough. I never advocated a violent stand, but people will push until resistance is met. That was the point of my QUESTION. It was only a question and not a statement. Someone else tried to pin that on me and it didn't turn out well for them;)
     

    Ab_Normal

    Ab_member
    Feb 2, 2010
    8,613
    Carroll County
    I think you are talking dangerous shit and living in a fantasy. I have no breaking point because I love my country and my flag. Period. Don't like all of the laws or the policies, and those I object to, I avail myself of the courts and political process to try and affect change. But the notion of taking up arms against my country is ludicrous.

    If one side plays by the rules and the other side doesn't play by the rules or keeps changing the rules to suit them, which side do you think will prevail?
     

    Nay_sayer

    ...
    May 30, 2013
    601
    Lothian, MD
    My point would be when the government institutes a complete ban and turn-in. When they start kicking in doors and seizing guns, that's the time to take a firm (and violent, if necessary) stand for our 2nd amendment rights.

    So they can take your freedom of speech, right to assembly, property rights, and all the rest but you'll only fight back if they come after your guns?

    Each one of our rights is as important as the others. If we let them take just one away without a fight then we have already lost the rest of them.
     

    BlackBart

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Mar 20, 2007
    31,609
    Conewago, York Co. Pa.
    I think you are talking dangerous shit and living in a fantasy. I have no breaking point because I love my country and my flag. Period. Don't like all of the laws or the policies, and those I object to, I avail myself of the courts and political process to try and affect change. But the notion of taking up arms against my country is ludicrous.

    And when your country looks NOTHING like your country once did. It's ruled by a pos that thinks he's King, ruined the best healthcare in the world and encourages non productive turds to follow a free ride for a vote? When the COTUS no longer is in play?

    Dangerous shit? Maybe.... for the trash that should be taken out and strung up. It's a shame Jefferson isn't alive to give us his take on the matter.

    I'm glad I saw it in it's best of times, it's gone to shit bit by bit since 1992 IMHO. :sad20:
     

    defygravity

    Active Member
    May 5, 2012
    808
    Baltimore County
    And when your country looks NOTHING like your country once did. It's ruled by a pos that thinks he's King, ruined the best healthcare in the world and encourages non productive turds to follow a free ride for a vote? When the COTUS no longer is in play?

    Dangerous shit? Maybe.... for the trash that should be taken out and strung up. It's a shame Jefferson isn't alive to give us his take on the matter.

    I'm glad I saw it in it's best of times, it's gone to shit bit by bit since 1992 IMHO. :sad20:

    Ruined the best healthcare in the world? What world do you live in?

    Trying to fix the American health care system is lime trying to polish a turd.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
     

    jpk1md

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 13, 2007
    11,313
    Started earlier than that. Look to Lincoln for the beginning of the process. (Your line about secession is interesting; you'll recall the events of the 1860s revolved around just that issue, and it was slapped down pretty strongly at the time.)

    BTW, welcome.

    Actually it goes back a full generation plus further than that to Washington's Sec of State Thomas Pickering who was instrumental in the NORTH's call for secession in the Hartford Convention of 1814-15
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,402
    Messages
    7,280,308
    Members
    33,449
    Latest member
    Tactical Shepherd

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom