Wednesday, April 8, 2015

A classic case of asking the wrong question. The real question is "How many dead tyrannical politicians and rogue cops does it take to stop firearm confiscation?"

"Remember: Evil exists because good men don't kill the government officials committing it." -- Kurt Hofmann.
Will police confiscate guns if the government orders it?
This is entirely the wrong question. Let's accept the premise, as those who live behind enemy in states like Connecticut are forced to every day. The salient question is instead: How many tyrannical politicians and rogue cops doing their bidding is it necessary to kill before the raids stop? My guess is, not very many.
The French have a saying, "pour encourager les autres." "To encourage the others." This is used ironically as in "The Colonel had to be shot in order to encourage the others." Exactly.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

"How many tyrannical politicians and rogue cops doing their bidding is it necessary to kill before the raids stop? My guess is, not very many."

Agreed. The "Useful Idiots," under the guise of "I was just following orders" best understand reality. Sporting a badge may prop up a false sense of power, but they live in the same community as the intended victims of such tyrannical scenario. These same useful idiots, then, have property, families, and offspring---all of which become targets when PAYBACK begins.
Is this fair response from those who refuse to become victims? Of course it is. After all, "Tis better to give than receive." So, when given a measure of grief by those who wish to suppress us, the fair response is to return a greater measure of grief.
How many tyrannical politicians and rogue cops will need to fall before others see the error in their ways? Your answer is correct: Not very many.

Anonymous said...

Lone Ranger-"Tonto..You go to town." Tonto-"Tonto no go to town. Tonto get crap beat out of him again!"
Lone Ranger-"But we need information!"
Tonto-"You go to hell keemosabe. Tonto no go to town!"

Longbow said...

Cops, including the author of the piece will do exactly as they are ordered to do. Your rights be damned. They might bury their own guns, but yours they would confiscate (and sleep well at night). If they have to kill you in the "due process"? Oh well, as they say, if you wan to make an omelet...

Anonymous said...

Families.
I mean no disrespect to anyone here but I cannot, will not target anybody's family or children. Put them under surveillance most certainly.
Innocents are off limits. In my AO such acts will earn you a firing squad.
If you do your homework well enough and you are thinking in 4thGen terms your hunting will reap far more dividends. Only the truly criminally culpable must be made to answer for their crimes. We hold ourselves as men of honor and of the highest principal. we talk about holding the moral high ground.

We are either one or the other. If we are really defenders of what is right and true then we must not one whisper escape our lips at any time about targeting civilians.
It is my opinion that if you have to whack family members to fulfill your mission then you need to take a long hard look at how or who is making these kinds of tactical decisions. Because it shows an awful lot as to their capacity for military planning as a whole.

Dick Marcinko preaches creativity and flexibility and personal accountability. By his example I strive to be much more than a Rifleman.

But do not fool yourself. You cant be like them and win. - The Bellevue Headhunter

Doug said...

Look at it another way. Do they really have enough men who are willing to die to take our guns?

Not near enough.
They may think they do.
They will run out of warm bodies far quicker than the fig leaf of misguided illusion of legitimacy which cloaks their tyranny.

Dutchman6 said...

"I mean no disrespect to anyone here but I cannot, will not target anybody's family or children."

Precisely. Anyone who does so has not internalized the Three Percent Catechism and is therefore not a Three Percenter. Period.