Friday, January 14, 2011

"Progressive" historical amnesiac sez: "You want a gun so you can kill police or soldiers. Are you out of your minds?"

The Borg bleats, "Resistance is futile."

"Guns For Killing Cops and Soldiers?"

When discussing issues of gun rights/gun control, it amazes me how people argue for needing a gun to fight the police or the military. What you're saying is you want a gun so you can kill police or soldiers. Are you out of your minds?

Two hundred and thirty five years ago, armed resurrection was possible. Maybe even 100 years ago. But today, with the weapons the government possesses, it is totally impossible. The weapons that can take down a government that are threatened, that you should be fighting for are the internet, words, free media...

We're never going to be in a situation where using guns to fight police is a viable, reasonable or sane option. The fact is, we have to face the problems we face with ways that can actually work. Martin Luther King faced oppressive injustice and incredible corruption and won using non-violence. People owned guns in Nazi Germany. It didn't help.

There he goes, another collectivist extrapolating from his own cowardice again. Obviously he's never heard of the armed veterans of the Deacons for Defense and Justice who guarded MLK's saintly ass at night from the Klan. "Non-violence?" (Insert snort.)

"What you're saying is you want a gun so you can kill police or soldiers. Are you out of your minds?" The answers to those two statements/questions are, in order, "yes" and no."

This is Reinhard Heydrich. He was a policeman.

This is what his car looked like after Czech resistance fighters assassinated him.

These are soldiers of the Wehrmacht Feld Polizei after an entire village was wiped out in retribution. No doubt somewhere in this welter of dead innocents you could have found at least one believer in non-violence.

When police and soldiers conduct themselves as butchers of innocents, you bet your ass I want a firearm to defend myself.

This is an American religious community wiped out by federal policemen and soldiers of Delta Force on 19 April 1995.

Functional difference between Waco and Lidice?



irishdutchuncle said...

he also doesn't seem to know the difference between resurrection, and insurrection.

Pat H. said...

The progressive/fascists are ululating louder and louder, wasting their breath.

It's unfortunate that some of them are throwing down the gauntlet this coming week, but they are.

How many will have to be sanctioned with extreme prejudice is unclear, but my bet is on around half a dozen to several dozen before they get their minds right.

For the record, we in South Carolina managed to persuade former congressman and RINO Bob Inglis to not return here, he's received a fellowship to Harvard.

Anonymous said...

Good ole' MLK was able to do what he did for the simple reason that he was essentially 'allowed' to. Just as Ghandi was allowed to. It has been written that history would be entirely different had Ghandi been up against, oh, say the Japanese. Had Dr King tried what he did say against the Russian government of the time - well, Jan 17 would not be a national holiday.
The Second Amendment IS NOT about home protection or hunting. IT NEVER WAS. Government is nothing but force and force is the only way to control it. TPTB are still afraid of us (less so every day)- God help us if they lose that fear.

Anonymous said...

Asshat... the people of Germany and Barvaria did not have firearms as they had been confiscated by the nazis. A fact that hitler was very proud of; as I am sure you and your ilk would be.

Your ignorance of history is tragic but many will make sure that the mistakes made by the German people won't be repeated here in the US of A. Hopefully the socialist workers party will take our convictions to heart and temper thier wild eyed fantasies.

Not holding my breath however.

wl moses

Anonymous said...

Another, perhaps less well known, example is Oradour-sur-Glane in France....a ghost town that feels chilly on the warmest days:

At the very least, armed citizens can keep it from being a one-sided massacre


Defender said...

Well put, Mike.
Over at, the Brady bunch and friends regularly post their press release lies, including the debunked, disproved and amazingly stupid ones. They get their asses handed to them by an estimated 97 percent of commenters.
One of the latest is that the Deacons for Defense made not a whit of difference. That blacks who armed themselves against the terrorism of the Klan suffered worse because of it. The guy who emailed you has his talking points sheet right in front of him, but had the brainpower to cast it in his own angry words.
The police with dogs and firehoses at Selma were fortunate that the civil rights marchers DECIDED to be nonviolent and be injured or die instead.
Spike Lee is on an anti-gun rampage again. Lee, who said someone should shoot Charlton Heston with a [cheap and easily available] Bulldog .44"
Heston was a member of the NAACP and marched with civil rights activists. Thanks for helping us get OUR rights. F--- YOURS.

Defender said...

"The constitution's second amendment, giving the right to bear arms..."

Wrong from the get-go.
He complains about massive police security at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh BECAUSE OF THE COST.
At similar meetings in Europe, police tend to shoot people -- for just SHOUTING -- in the chest at 10 feet with teargas grenades. The video is on YouTube.
I guesss Kail feels like the bitch had it coming.
Then there's Officer Bubbles -- shaved head, tactical sunglasses. You know him -- working a protest in Canada, who told a bubble-blowing protester "If one of those touches me, I'm arresting you for assault.
He did.
Then he filed suit when THAT ended up on YouTube, because THAT was harassment and embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

"What you're saying is you want a gun so you can kill police or soldiers. Are you out of your minds?

Two hundred and thirty five years ago, armed resurrection was possible. Maybe even 100 years ago. But today, with the weapons the government possesses, it is totally impossible."

Really? I don't think so.

During WW2, the future Marshall Tito, then the key leader of the Yugoslavian resistance to the Germans occupying his country, was asked, "How will your partisans, armed only with old rifles, take on the Germans and their new panzers?"

The same issue - vastly superior weaponry in government hands vs. that of the resistance. Well, here is Tito's answer:

"When the Germans get out of their new panzers to take a piss, my partisans will shoot them with their old rifles."

IOW, don't fight the enemy where he is strong, fight him when YOU have the advantage (or at least where the odds are much less unfavorable to you). That's been basic to warfare for, oh, thousands of years. But this @sshole clearly knows next to nothing about strategy, tactics and weaponry (and, of course, this person is not the least bit interested in overthrowing any government, no matter how oppressive - this crappy argument is just a rationalization for forcing everyone to be disarmed).

Anonymous said...

"You can't win, so don't even try"? Ahahahhahahahhahahha.

Murphy's 3rd law of combat: Your weapons system was made by the lowest bidder that believes the holy grail is in spare parts sales.

As has been said, I may or may not be able to take out your Apache, however I do have intimate knowledge of what it takes to keep that hanger queen flying.

Got spare parts? Got hot chow? Got fresh socks?

My boys will have all of those things, and some of your stuff to boot.

Uncle Al said...

Edit needed:
Waco massacre was in 1993.
OKC was 1995.

Cranky_Yankee said...

Afghanistan anyone, see how well that's worked out for occupying forces.

We (Americans as a whole) don't want to kill anyone, that's the difference between restorers (trying to retain their freedoms) and destroyers (trying to re-leave you of said freedoms).

Rational people only fight when compelled to, for defense, not gain or ideology.

Anonymous said...

The writer of the article make a great many assumptions which are not true. Non-violence can work but it didn't in the Soviet Union and many other places.

Sometimes you are left without a choice, which will actually work, other than violence and destruction. Once blood is spilled, the die is cast and is then replicated, in stronger media at every new incident.

Anonymous said...

Send the author your famed article on "Liberator" pistols dropped over France during WWII.....and excellent article on the subject.

The weapon isn't what's's the will to use it.


Anonymous said...

There are more criminals with badges and uniforms than without.

Anonymous said...

wl moses,
you had better read up on history a little more. This disarming of the Germans is propaganda and always has been. My father grew up during that time and in no way were they disarmed. You can also find pictures of G.I.'s going house to house rounding up personal firearms after the war. You are a victim of more NRA brainwashing.


H. Nelson said...

The author at opednews failed to understand the dynamics of his case.

Fact: There are more weapons in private hands in the United States than there are in the Chinese government arsenals.

Fact: The average ratio of police to civilian population is 504 civilians to 1 cop.

With some simple math we can figure out who will be on the losing end.

Current population of the United States is 307,006,550. Three percent will make a stand and take on local and federal authorities. that would be 9,210,196. Ball park figure for police forces: 609,139.
Ratio of 3percenters to cops 15:1.

The odds don't look like they are in favor of the police.

There are other force multipliers that are not considered in. Police walking away from their jobs when asked to do something against the Constitution. The extreme left assisting law enforcement in rooting out 3percenters.

Jazz said...

...just a passing thought:

If people armed with rifles can't do much of anything against a modern military or police force, with their armor and all, why are we still losing troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Anonymous said...

Where I work at most of us are ex/retired military or law enforcement. The last thing that any of us want to do is kill military or LE. However, to a man, we see what is happening to our country and have prepared accordingly.

Kerry said...

As I understand it, Heydrich died some weeks later from blood poisoning cause by the grenade blowing horse hair from the car seats into his body. And I think also both one grenade did not explode, and one gun (Sten?) misfired. Nevertheless, the person writing the article might just as well be saying, "I quit, don't hit me" or some such jello spine.

pdxr13 said...

Resurrection is something done in the company of Witches in a graveyard by the light of the new moon, or Dr. Frankenstein in the lab. That is to say a fiction for children to believe that some people, somewhere, can overcome the end of an individual life by mysticism or super-technology. For the Christian, God is only capable of this. If science does find a way to preserve a functional body-brain-personality essentially forever, I propose that that entity is no longer human.

Insurrection, OTOH, is as close and soon as you want it. Guns are not required by a mass-movement, but it levels the playing field nicely for freedom-seeking people. Police and military are not the target of such an event, but evil political controllers who believe in the perfectability of man (if we kill or reform the unhappy people, paradise on Earth will spring into existence) are.

Anonymous said...
"Murphy's 3rd law of combat: Your weapons system was made by the lowest bidder that believes the holy grail is in spare parts sales."
January 14, 2011 7:41 AM

The exception being when people rightly believe that failing to build the cheapest-most-effective weapon will cost them their lives and the nation. This is normally a last-resort on the eve of invasion or after major defeat. Rather than a hyper-optimized super-light corrosion-proof highly-profitable enemy-wounder, an ugly cheap ultra-reliable 150M bullet-projector is made in quantity as fast as humanly possible. Examples: STEN smg and Liberator Pistol. The Russians are still making derivatives of Mike's Rifle of 1947 because they still listen to Stalin : "Quantity has a quality of its' own".

"Credible Threat" by free people is the most important thing. When actual fighting happens, the people have failed in their duty to present a credible opposition/option to police/gov power. We are closer to that than ever.

Got militia?

Anonymous said...

Um, how about at Waco Koresh was screwing children? But maybe you're okay with that?

J. Travis said...

Do you notice how easily the freedom-thieves shift from, "nobody is going to take away your guns", to "surrender or DIE"?

The mask is off, and they mean to seize power totally and irrevocably. If it takes civil war, re-education camps, and democide to do it, well as Stalin said, "one death is tragic, a million is a statistic. (IIRC)

Unlike WWII, and Afghanistan this war will have no rules.

Defender said...

Thank you for the link, BoarHawg. I'm glad they left the ruins as a memorial. A memorial to what government employees will do with supervisor approval and when it's all legal-like.

Defender said...

But there are no equivalent people or institutions on the Left. Not even "Stone Henry Hyde AND his wife and children" Alec Baldwin. Not even "Shoot Charlton Heston with a .44 Bulldog" Spike Lee.

I could only take a minute-thirty-three out of five-plus.

Rhodes said...

I am of the opinion what Ron Kall has done here is make a perfect case for the removal of all restrictions on any type of firearm ownership.

He is correct such defensive actions would indeed be difficult to conduct against the police state as it stands now. So fact is if the government is allowed a weapon on US shores then the citizen has the right to the same weapon.

But if we are limited to 308 semis in the beginning then we will do the best we can until better is available, as always happens.

Well done Mr. Kall.

Anonymous said...

Line of significance:

"Her new plan would use mobile surveillance systems, drones,..."

Do you understand?

Defender said...

Former campaigner for Ms. Giffords, who calls us a mob and swastika-carriers. He says the Tea Party has its first case of "Second Amendment remedies."
Makes me almost wonder if she didn't put out the contract on herself. Just shoot ME a little, Jared.
He was probably only supposed to graze her. I guess he was caught up in the moment and forgot.

Bad Cyborg said...

I believe Kall and all those who think like him believe that only a handfull of peopole will actually have the stones to rebel. In this case even 1.5% (as opposed to the historic 3%) would mean that the troops on the pointy end of the spear will be badly outnumbered.

We cannot know what the attitude of loyalist troops vis a vis reprisals but I wouldn't (won't?) be surprise if they happen - especially if they start loosing. I believe that after a while the loyalists troops are likely to be essentially home-grown mercenaries. When things start getting really bloody and residential neighborhoods and city centers start becoming killing fields, I personally believe that there will be a lot of defections onto the rebel side. I also believe that the Oath Keepers will account for a lot of defections as well as 5th column type activities in the loyalist-held territory.

Shit hot, high-tech weapons are all well and good, unless they are being used against your own people. I'm not at all sure how ferociously the loyalist troops (except for the thug and "the only ones" types) will fight anyway. It is one thing to fight in towns and villages far away and in an alien culture. It is a different matter to conduct Faluja-style operations in sub-divisions like the one you grew up in.

But we'll see, won't we. Dammit! We'll see. But I know one thing. Resistance is never futile. Even if we lose, fighting and dieing for our own liberty and that of our children and grandchildren is better than meekly walking into the ovens.

Bad Cyborg X

jack said...


I didn't know ATF stands for "alcohol, tobacco and screwing children," thanks for educating me.

And BTW, everybody knows that to save the children we have to burn them, eh?

Dedicated_Dad said...

Anon@12:54 - that's a sick, vicious lie that says more about the liar than it ever could about its victim.

That you still buy it, after so many years and when the truth is readily accessible says quite a bit about YOU as well.

The folks in Waco were strange, and believed in a brand of religion most of us would find a bit nuts.

Coincidentally, that pretty much describes how most Americans view you leftards.

Luckily - for you - this isn't grounds for summary execution, much less extended torture and immolation with soldiers placed to shoot any who try to escape -- which is EXACTLY what was done to innocents at Waco.

For the sane who may read this, I think we're going to have to add another one to the list of stuff you have to believe to be a leftard:

"To be a leftard... you have to believe it's appropriate to torture and burn children you claim are victims of parental or other abuse."


wirecutter said...

Had a commenter at our local paper remark that the 2nd Amendment was invalid because in order to combat our government we'd need fighter jets and thermonuclear weapons.
My response was "Yeah. Tell that to the Afghans."

Anonymous said...

I wonder how this man's sentiments carry over to small numbers of poorly armed and equipped men in Iraq and Afghanistan successfully defeating the very same military in question. Or to the Vietnamese. Or to the Boers. Or to the Congo region of Africa. Or to virtually any armed conflict in the 20th century involving a major traditional military power fighting a guerrilla force.

I often pose this question to people who think like this; can they name a successful instance of a state defeating a non-state actor in an asymmetric war in the 20th century?

Bad Cyborg said...

Kall asks if I want guns so that I can kill police and soldiers. No, Mr. Kall, I have no desire at all to kill police and soldiers. I want guns to protect myself from - and kill if needs be - oath breakers. The only form of life lower than an oath breaker is one who deliberately fails to keep faith with his comrades-in-arms. OATH BREAKERS! That's who I want to kill. If the oath breaker threatening me or mine happens to be wearing a police or military uniform then so be it.

But make no mistake. My desire is only to protect my family and to stop oath breakers from harming my family. Once they have identified themselves - BY THEIR ACTIONS - as oath breakers, then they are no longer anything but a threat to be dealt with.

Bad Cyborg X

Happy D said...

Functional difference between Waco and Lidice?

More jews and blacks at waco, something that never hits the drive by "media".

Funny thing is Rob Kall is that ignorant of history, technology, policing and all things military.

Anonymous said...

They know less about the Constitution that random people on the street.
Journalists are the same.

Anonymous said...

I am of the opinion what Ron Kall has done here is make a perfect case for the removal of all restrictions on any type of firearm ownership. --Rhodes

Congratulations on your deft usage of the reductio ad absurdum. :^)


Defender said...

The excuse mill after Waco said:
The Davidians were forcing children into underage sex.
No complaints filed with local law enforcement, as far as I know, and it wasn't mentioned in the preparatory warrants, was it?
There was a meth lab.
Seventh-Day Adventists, of which the Davidians were an offshoot, don't even eat shellfish. It's unclean. And there was no evidence.
They had grenades.
One of their cottage industries was to make novelty "Complaint Department -- Take a number" grenade plaques using the empty bodies of surplus store practice grenades. The number tag is attached to the pin.
If they're willing to kill you over a $200 gun registration fee you don't even owe, they're willing to lie about it, surely.
The statists posting and commenting at are amazed that we still care about Waco. They see no connection between Waco and today's fear of big government. They were, after all, just a cult. A terrible tragedy that they burned themselves to death, but that's what cults do sometimes.
Oh yeah, the next Waco will be justified the same way.
And Janet Napolitano's office is taking names.