Gun grabbing in Boston met with resistance

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!
  • zoostation

    , ,
    Moderator
    Jan 28, 2007
    22,857
    Abingdon
    I have the utmost respect for our service people.....

    But given your response are you implying that if POTUS was to force an executive order or if MOM or whomever pushed for confiscation that the Nat. Guard would not be the tip of the spear? I think we all know the answer to this.

    No, I don't know. But since you've broached the subject why don't you tell us?


    Maybe I'm just being overly sensitive, but I don't like the way they are portrayed in this story, even in a hypothetical sense. Like I said, I find it offensive. Perhaps others don't.
     

    Dal1as

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 6, 2009
    4,149
    I have the utmost respect for our service people.....

    But given your response are you implying that if POTUS was to force an executive order or if MOM or whomever pushed for confiscation that the Nat. Guard would not be the tip of the spear? I think we all know the answer to this.

    What you are implying would not happen. Many in the military and police forces are pro 2A and would desert or turn on their own govt if such an order was given. Are you prior military? Clever piece of work but using the National Guard just doesn't fit.
     

    Mooseman

    R.I.P.- Hooligan #4
    Jan 3, 2012
    18,048
    Western Maryland
    What you are implying would not happen. Many in the military and police forces are pro 2A and would desert or turn on their own govt if such an order was given. Are you prior military? Clever piece of work but using the National Guard just doesn't fit.

    Don't be so sure. I have a friend that is in the reserves and a LEO. He tells everyone that will listen that he can't wait to come and take our guns.
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    I have the utmost respect for our service people.....

    But given your response are you implying that if POTUS was to force an executive order or if MOM or whomever pushed for confiscation that the Nat. Guard would not be the tip of the spear? I think we all know the answer to this.

    The President cannot press the National Guard into service without usage of War Powers act or a national state of emergency. Katrina was a state mandate to t he national guard not federal.

    And the carousel keeps going round and round.
     

    stu929

    M1 Addict
    Jan 2, 2012
    6,605
    Hagerstown
    What you are implying would not happen. Many in the military and police forces are pro 2A and would desert or turn on their own govt if such an order was given. Are you prior military? Clever piece of work but using the National Guard just doesn't fit.

    You believe that the majority of the Nat Guard would desert? I find that hard to believe more so than refusing to follow orders.

    Never intended or wanted to get into a pissing match. I do feel though that the belief that this could never happen again is nieve.
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    You believe that the majority of the Nat Guard would desert? I find that hard to believe more so than refusing to follow orders.

    Never intended or wanted to get into a pissing match. I do feel though that the belief that this could never happen again is nieve.

    Yeah because the oath they took requires them to follow orders blindly. :sad20: THe only good thing Clinton did in his presidency was allow for unethical, illegal orders to be questioned by soldiers.
     

    jpo183

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 20, 2013
    4,116
    in Maryland
    In Katrina the police and national guard did it without a problem. I believe this is when Oathkeepers started getting more of a presence.

    Heres my .02:

    I am hoping and believe that the national guard and local sheriff would not help confiscate or participate. I believe however that it depends on where you live. Maryland is a toss up. If you live in MOCO your screwed, Fred Co is still questionable. What I believe (and backed by DHS reports) is that veterans will not shoot Americans and that only the young recruits that have started will obey orders since they do not "know" the difference. I am hopeful that we have many Sgts, LTS, Cpts that would refuse and their men would do the same based on their leadership. DHS would be the grinder though not Nat Guard / LEO (hopefully)

    I believe if it came down to this we would see red states develop state militias where the nat guard and LEO would back them and blue states confiscate.

    A concern is that if some how the middle ground people would have the action justified by a higher up (like boston) and then they would do it "for the greater good" and excuse the trampling of rights. We are in a society that IS trading security for liberty and that is the problem.

    The biggest problem I see is that an individual resisting forced entry against the 4th will lose, the only way we can take BACK ground is as a group and that is tough unless our Local Sherrifs tell us where the line in the sand is. Unfortunately the dont / wont and now we have so many people looking back and forth trying to figure out when.
     

    rmiddle

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 8, 2012
    1,083
    Cleveland, TN
    As soon as I read the title......I knew what you were writing.

    We dont have the balls to do that today.

    I think if the Federal Government were to do an outright ban and not do it as a 1000 cuts there would be open revolute. The issue is up until now it has been slow and limited. The boiling pot issue. If we went from 1950 to now in a day there would be open warfare but it was done slowly over decades and most people accept it. Although I think we have hit the point were they can no longer hide there goals and people are getting fed up.

    Lets face it the post Newton push for gun control was the biggest I can ever remember and I am now in my 40's and the end results. New York, Maryland, and Colorado pases new laws. I can't remember if CT has been signed or not. Delaware, and New Jersey still have laws in process.

    On the flip side several states weaken there gun control laws. WV lets you bypass the background check if you have a CCW permit and made several other pro gun changes. Kentucky is pretty much Constitutional Carry Now.

    At the federal level the best change for Gun Grabbers went down in flames likely because they got too greedy. They are still tiring but with the house the way it is I can't see anything get though at the federal level right now.

    So the greatest push for gun control in the end netted then 1 new state Colorado. We will see after the next election if the Gun Grabbers take a beating that state could see a reverse of the law if a enough Gun Grabbers loose there seats.

    And the states that already had limits got a little worse. Granted it sucks and we need to do what we can in MD to make those who voted for the bill pay. See DINO project but what did the biggest media blitz of recent memory actually get them?

    Thanks
    Robert
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    For the love God please someone that was in Boston describe what you went on. Not news articles our sound bites of photo bites actual one hundred percent unadulterated account. The site should have a forum just for Monday Morning Quarterbacking.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,680
    Messages
    7,291,182
    Members
    33,501
    Latest member
    Shive62

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom