While cool of you to say, realistically the most pro 2A amendement nutjobs are awfully quiet with the US descent into fascism since said nutjobs likely voted for the Nazi. This is leopard eating my face
Even if you have the ability to defend yourself against a bully that is motivated by piss and vinegar, that doesn’t mean you want a target on your back or for them to see you coming.
My guess is that many of the people who are willing to resist kinetically aren’t going to say anything or threaten anyone.
One day, a thug kicks down the wrong door and punches his own ticket. The next day the paranoia grips the jackboots and they start passing gun laws in a hurry.
Lots of cold dead hands after that and no one is willing to volunteer to be first in line to kick off that process.
Historically, this is why police come after you while you’re in a car, at work, or otherwise out and about. I’m curious whether, if it ever came to that point, a court would approve seizure* of any records at gun ranges or otherwise to gather data on people who might have guns (being very specific with that ‘might have’ wording), and then issue warrants to seize said people on the street, and then issue search warrants for the home. It would be a pretty wild reversal of evidence and probable cause. The politicians and cops would try to sell it to the maga fools as being the only way to keep cops safe from antifa terrorists, and I’d bet they would buy it.
That (judges signing off on such wild bullshit) would be so far into fascist territory that we might as well be at the bottom of fascism lake.
*This would probably be a grand jury subpoena, which both has lower evidence needs and relies on the reasoning that your transactions/records with a business are not as private as other areas of your life. Cops give these to DAs all the time to gather evidence on a case without the need to go to a judge, so blaming the courts here might be too hasty.
I’m not a pro2A nut job, I’m a stoner that owns firearms and won’t be willing to give them up without a fight. I don’t mean it as a threat, just a statement of fact. If the state comes to take my guns, without a REALLY good reason, that seems like the point where I start fighting back, damn my job, damn my house.
Just… saying this here, mate, but if that’s the case, unless your opsec is so tight that the nsa wouldn’t know if you’re trump himself posting for funsies, you probably shouldn’t state that out loud. That is literally what the other fella that replied to you meant when he said ‘threat.’
I mean, I would have to scrub my entire Internet history for that to make any difference. Look at Platner and Palantir, I have posted about owning guns, smoking weed, and my mental health for years. That cow is out to pasture. If there’s a list, I’m on it. I rely on being a small drop in a large sea of gun owners that have posted similar shit way louder with their name proudly displayed above it.
They can have my gun, but it comes with bullets.
While cool of you to say, realistically the most pro 2A amendement nutjobs are awfully quiet with the US descent into fascism since said nutjobs likely voted for the Nazi. This is leopard eating my face
Never threaten.
Even if you have the ability to defend yourself against a bully that is motivated by piss and vinegar, that doesn’t mean you want a target on your back or for them to see you coming.
My guess is that many of the people who are willing to resist kinetically aren’t going to say anything or threaten anyone.
One day, a thug kicks down the wrong door and punches his own ticket. The next day the paranoia grips the jackboots and they start passing gun laws in a hurry.
Lots of cold dead hands after that and no one is willing to volunteer to be first in line to kick off that process.
Historically, this is why police come after you while you’re in a car, at work, or otherwise out and about. I’m curious whether, if it ever came to that point, a court would approve seizure* of any records at gun ranges or otherwise to gather data on people who might have guns (being very specific with that ‘might have’ wording), and then issue warrants to seize said people on the street, and then issue search warrants for the home. It would be a pretty wild reversal of evidence and probable cause. The politicians and cops would try to sell it to the maga fools as being the only way to keep cops safe from antifa terrorists, and I’d bet they would buy it.
That (judges signing off on such wild bullshit) would be so far into fascist territory that we might as well be at the bottom of fascism lake.
*This would probably be a grand jury subpoena, which both has lower evidence needs and relies on the reasoning that your transactions/records with a business are not as private as other areas of your life. Cops give these to DAs all the time to gather evidence on a case without the need to go to a judge, so blaming the courts here might be too hasty.
I’m not a pro2A nut job, I’m a stoner that owns firearms and won’t be willing to give them up without a fight. I don’t mean it as a threat, just a statement of fact. If the state comes to take my guns, without a REALLY good reason, that seems like the point where I start fighting back, damn my job, damn my house.
Just… saying this here, mate, but if that’s the case, unless your opsec is so tight that the nsa wouldn’t know if you’re trump himself posting for funsies, you probably shouldn’t state that out loud. That is literally what the other fella that replied to you meant when he said ‘threat.’
I mean, I would have to scrub my entire Internet history for that to make any difference. Look at Platner and Palantir, I have posted about owning guns, smoking weed, and my mental health for years. That cow is out to pasture. If there’s a list, I’m on it. I rely on being a small drop in a large sea of gun owners that have posted similar shit way louder with their name proudly displayed above it.