search
top

Maybe I’m Wrong

I’ve been saying the boogaloo will probably start in Oregon, but I might need to rethink that prediction, since it seems Oregon Democrats are smarter than Virginia Democrats.

Democratic Virginia Rep. Donald McEachin suggested cutting off state funds to counties that do not comply with any gun control measures that pass in Richmond. 

“They certainly risk funding, because if the sheriff’s department is not going to enforce the law, they’re going to lose money. The counties’ attorneys offices are not going to have the money to prosecute because their prosecutions are going to go down,” he said. 

McEachin also noted that Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam could call the National Guard, if necessary.

Call out the National Guard to enforce gun control? That’ll turn out well, I’m sure. That move totally has never sparked a revolution at any point in our past. These people are absolutely out of control.

So how does Governor Blackface think this works? How do you determine whose funding gets cut off? If a county prosecutor exercises discretion to not charge an otherwise law abiding person with violating these unconstitutional laws, does that trigger the funding cut? What triggers the funding cut?

68 Responses to “Maybe I’m Wrong”

  1. Carl says:

    Substitute “sanctuary cities that don’t enforce immigration law” for “sheriff’s departments that don’t enforce gun control” and watch heads explode. A dandy game for all!

  2. aerodawg says:

    I think it’s funny they think the guardsmen, who predominantly come from those rural areas, are gonna go shoot their friends and neighbors to satisfy the urban political twits….

    • Andy B. says:

      Who shot the students at Kent State on May 4, 1970? (Hint: Draft dodgers who might have been expected to sympathize with the students.)

      As a veteran I always say: Don’t trust what soldiers will do.

    • Andy B. says:

      “As a veteran I always say: Don’t trust what soldiers will do.”

      I thought I’d come back and illustrate my ironic wisecrack with an Old Story — for a change. ;-)

      In my experience military cadre are adept at translating everything into “Us vs. Those People” confrontations.

      I was stationed near Washington, DC for training early in 1966. It was our first training after Basic. In 1965 there had been a number of small-scale riots and violent confrontations with the police in DC.

      None of us had experienced or even heard of an “alert” before. One came along only a few weeks into training. They issued out our rifles and bayonets, and a buck sergeant told us we might be going to Washington to quell a riot.

      By luck-of-the-draw I had been assigned to one of those “Good Army Schools” that had few blacks in it, but there were a few. Probably for their benefit the spin we were given was that we would be confronting “urban welfare types” who had nothing better to do than riot and give the police a hard time, while we were serving our country. We were not raring to go, but we would have gone. (We had no training in crowd control.)

      It never happened. It was a run-of-the-mill periodic alert, intended only for practice in issuing-out equipment. But I saw what could be done, and how it would be done. There is nothing like putting on a uniform to give you a feeling of superiority that ought not be challenged.

      Also remember — soldiers are going to be kids. They will do what they are told.

      • aerodawg says:

        There’s a bit of a difference between getting sent into an active protest or especially a riot and getting sent to squash duly elected officials and kick in doors of otherwise peaceful citizens. Yah, the NCOs might push the us vs them and the rank and file might just do as they’re told, but in the case I’ve described I doubt it….

        • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

          Yep. Plus there is a difference between protesters who hate the military and who the military doesn’t like, compared to people the military not only likes but agrees wholeheartedly with.

          • Andy B. says:

            I’ll always admit to being a cynic, but no one placed in a position of authority will tolerate the people under their authority saying “no” to them, or even suggesting that they might. See my “Kent State” example above. The National Guard wasn’t there because they wanted to be in Vietnam, or even to be soldiers. And yet they shot down students who agreed with them on those issues.

            • HSR47 says:

              Maybe, but those students weren’t wise enough to differentiate between grunts in uniform and the politicians issuing the orders to those grunts. It was actually a very common problem at the time, and remains one to this day—many on the left look down on those in the military, and view it as something only people who are poor, desperate, and/or patriotically insane do. They’ve toned down the baby-killer rhetoric, and the spitting, but the disdain is still clearly there.

            • Richard says:

              One should never give an order that you don’t think will obeyed. I don’t know whether it will or not but the officers have got to be thinking about it.

              Kent State seems to have been spontaneous panic and not the product of an order.

      • jj says:

        Not everyone is a kid anymore. We got veterans with 18 years at war and everything in between. There will be no ‘cherry’ troops running amok. They are being led and guided by blooded veterans. Not the same circumstances.

  3. Chris says:

    I rather doubt the stonewall brigade (VA ARNG infantry unit) will enforce gun control. I find it more likely the 116 BCT will be working closely with local law enforcement.

    Who will they mobilize? A battalion of desk clerks, vehicle MX and other pogues?

  4. Joe says:

    The Left always shows who they are. I wonder how the “Fact Checkers”, also known as Democrat Party Politburo Propaganda Outlets (NYT, WaPo, Politifact, FactCheck) will try to spin this to cover up and prevent this from fostering anger in other parts of the country over this issue.

    That scumbag John Roberts at the SCOTUS needs to stop taking his spanky spankings from the Democrats, and SCOTUS is going to have to start striking down gun bans, because each ban that is allowed to be passed and upheld by the lower courts sets good ‘ole “precedent” to………BAN MORE GUNS!

    The proposed VA Assault Weapons stipulations affect every firearm of every action and type, aka, almost 80% of firearms sold in the country, including those still sold in states that have other so-called “Assault Weapons Bans”.

    And now, these statements show that the mask is truly off regarding the Scummy Stalinism of the Democrat Party. What a shame for Virginia, as it is sad as can be that the disgusting aspect of Tribalism based, Demographic Identity Politics is ushering this Stalinism in.

  5. 399 says:

    I’m wondering what we should think if the PA General Assembly uses funding cuts to enforce preemption of firearms issues? Same issue (gun control), same tactic, but approached from the other side.

    • HSR47 says:

      The right answer to preemption is what we already passed under Corbett, and which got tossed by PASC on a tenuous technicality: Statutory standing for gun owners and gun orgs to challenge ordinances violating preemption, and statutory provisions for attorneys fees and damages if it takes more than a sternly worded letter to get municipalities to bring their ordinances into compliance with preemption.

      • 399 says:

        Yes, and what is good for gun owners and gun issues is good for everyone and all issues. I have always thought all citizens have an interest in seeing our constitutions and laws are enforced, and should have automatic standing to challenge violators. Needing to wait to be harmed to have standing is like requiring a cop to wait for a crime to be thoroughly completed before intervening. Some mechanism may be required to filter out frivolous cases early, but our present system of needing “standing” is ridiculous and biased against all citizens.

  6. Stacy McMahon says:

    Couple observations:

    1) As of this Tuesday (a common day for local government public sessions in VA) 75 localities have passed 2A sanctuary resolutions. That’s a solid 70-75%. That’s huge, and to my mind backs up the theory that Republicans gave up the last election, more than Democrats won it.

    2) I’ve socialized the term “boogaloo” to several friends and co-workers around the region, including people who pay attention to politics, educated 2A supporters, a Trump-supporting federal agent, and the husband of a state elected official, and none of them had heard of it. I mean honest-to-gosh blank stares. Not sure what that means, but it’s interesting given how that word feels to me like it’s in the air on a daily basis.

    • Andy B. says:

      I only remember it in the context of “Drugs! Broads! Boogaloo!” but it was kind of archaic, even then, when I encountered it.

      I just found that it’s in the Urban Dictionary.

      That doesn’t mean it has traction, but I’m no good at judging such stuff anymore.

      • Peter O says:

        It’s a recent socal media meme (primary Twitter, I’ve seen some on Facebook).
        It’s a shortening from “Civil War 2: Electric Boogaloo” jokes.
        I.e. a bunch of jokes about what’s going to happen when second civil war kicks off.

    • Andy B. says:

      I just found that the ADL has been attributing the term to “white supremacists and gun owners.”

      Us old farts better watch out or we’ll be accused of not hanging with the right people.

      • Sebastian says:

        It’s not a white supremacist term in the least. The ADL has no idea what they are talking about.

        • MattW says:

          They probably know perfectly well it doesn’t have anything to do with white supremacists and they are still making the association intentionally

          • chiefjaybob says:

            I believe guardsmen, cops, regular army, any military force that may be used against a armed populace will shoot to kill. And shoot often. Not because they are bad people, or because they are communists, or because of any but one simple reason:

            They will not be told the truth.

            They will be told they are going in to put down an armed, racist, violent, anti-government, terrorist group, and the survival of the Republic depends on them following orders.

            It will be too late when they learn the truth.

            • Stacy M says:

              It will be too late when they learn the truth.

              The place where I hear boogaloo most often is a private group of mostly veterans and law enforcement on social media. I’ll wager most folks in uniform know the issue, though they aren’t all on the same side.

              I think the response by armed forces will depend mightily on the circumstances of the first outbreak of violence. Most people take notice of who shot first.

        • Andy B. says:

          Try Googling “boogaloo” along with a couple racial epithets, which I won’t suggest here. Don’t look at any hits where you know you won’t believe what they say — like the ADL.

          Here’s a sample to get you started:

          The Boogaloo channel also makes frequent references to the “1488” nazi dog-whistle. “14” stands for a 14-word slogan commonly used by white supremacists, while “88” is code for “Heil Hitler.”

          And to think that this morning I had never heard the word used in the “civil war” context! I guess we’re never too old to learn something! But I already knew from long experience that us gun rights folks are way too gullible and trusting.

          • Joe says:

            That “gullibility” might be a bit rope-a-doped. I’ve said on these blogs in the past regarding the issue that these so-called “White Nationalists” have shown up on cue whenever the Democrat Party has needed them to show up. Like with David Duke being used to scuttle the Reform Party, as well as the political careers of Jesse Ventura and Ross Perot, and the same goes for Trump.

            The Betsy Ross Flag, the “OK” sign, this “boogaloo” term which seems like a semi-childish word for let’s say…..”Cluster-Fuck” are now all of a sudden………terms and symbols of…….”White Nationalists”………..

            I’m calling BULLSHIT on the ADL, and they can sink into the sea and fuck-off as far as I’m concerned, because so many things in our society now are all too conveniently becoming “dog-whistles” for……..”White Nationalists”, right on cue to bail out and legitimize the Maoist filth on the left.

            • Andy B. says:

              I’ll differ with you for this reason: If you read the ADL article again, they don’t make an overt equivalence between “gun rights activists” and “white supremacists.” They credit gun rights activists with originating the “boogaloo” concept/term, and say “white supremacists” adopted it later. The ADL doesn’t use the word, but it wouldn’t be the first time something was “expropriated” by white supremacists. I’m thinking of that cartoonist guy whose “Pepe the Frog” was expropriated as a racist meme.

              My constant complaint — that I think I’ve made here before — was that gun rights activists were always total suckers for anyone “on the right” who made nice about the gun issue, and took fifteen minutes or so to learn the simplest rap, with a minor in Constitution-thumpimg. I know I’ve told the story before about the Christian Coalition guy who infiltrated the nascent “Keystone Firearms Coalition”, and who we made chairman until his wife outed him as having no interest in firearms at all; “If he ever brought a gun into our house I’d kill him.”

              I’ll emphasize that I’m telling that story on myself, because at the time I was as taken in as anybody, and it would not be the last time those people got over me.

              Gun owners have a chalk-mark on them, figuratively speaking, as easy marks for anyone who can throw a little “conservative” rap around. I’ve forgotten the names at this late date, but in the early/mid-’00s, when conservative organizations pulled their covert support away from some of the “Minuteman” type “border militias,” I recall that some of the personalities tried to transition their efforts to “gun rights,” though without much success; but the point of that was it was well known we were people on whom a living could be made, and we seldom tell even the seediest fellow-travelers to get lost.

        • Alex says:

          To be fair there is some overlap between gun owning militia types (who frequently fantasize about a new civil war) and white supremist groups. Gun rack + confederate flag + militia membership is a common combination in some parts of the country.

          • Sebastian says:

            Would suggest there isn’t. But just because you can find white supremacists using a slang term doesn’t mean the term is theirs, and more if they use “can” to refer to suppressor, it means “can” is a white supremacist term.

          • Andy B. says:

            “there is some overlap between gun owning militia types (who frequently fantasize about a new civil war) and white supremist groups.”

            I agree. Check out the decals on the pickup trucks on the parking lot of most any gun club.

            But here’s the complication: Some of the groups that are proven to be “white supremacist” in practices, sympathies, and rhetoric, deny it vehemently in public venues, even if the denials are not exactly plausible. Then, people who want to believe in the other, presentable things those groups claim to stand for, will choose to believe the denials and dismiss all sources that tell them otherwise.

            I tried to tell one very decent guy that an organization he believed strongly in was actually a white supremacist front. I went as far as finding a photo of their flag clustered with Confederate Battle Flags and swastikas, I think at “Unite the Right” at Charlottesville. His reply was “anyone can buy a flag.” He thought the photo was staged, and that I was the dupe for believing it.

            My theme and peeve for decades has been, what suckers gun owners are for any scumbags who will take the time to learn a little gun/constitution rap. Lately I’ve condensed that to, “B’lievers gonna B’lieve.” It wasn’t curiosity that killed the cat; it was gullibility.

          • Bram says:

            And? Are Freedom of Association and Speech still our rights or not?

  7. tincankilla says:

    1) Remember New Orleans. Highly loyal soldiers with low political awareness will be brought from out of state and told these are bad guys. They’ll do it, too, slowly and methodically with focused efforts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo

    2) We’ve spent almost two decades training our troops in how to raid and disarm “insurgents” in their homes. Screaming wives, zipcuffed fathers and teens, dead grandfathers, crying babies. They’ll do it in Virginia, just fine.

  8. Richard says:

    If the Left just wants to virtue signal, this simmer on in an uneasy standoff. If they actually try to enforce on an unwilling locality, odds go up on violence. Most blue states consist of one or two urban areas that politically dominate a conservative hinterland. VA,OR,CO,NV,WA,NM definitely fit this description and you can argue about others. A confrontation could happen in any of these places. The state authorities are unlikely to use overwhelming force. It has been observed that leftists think of violence like a dial that can be turned up or down while for conservatives it is an on/off switch. This difference makes miscalculations likely.

  9. Divemedic says:

    Didn’t the Federal courts already declare that defunding agencies because they are sanctuaries was unconstitutional?

    The left invented sanctuaries for marijuana and for illegal immigration. They are now angry because there are those on the right who have learned that what is good for the goose is sauce for the gander.

    • Andy B. says:

      “Didn’t the Federal courts already declare that defunding agencies because they are sanctuaries was unconstitutional?”

      I don’t know, but as a precedent it should open lots of cans of worms. Federal funding has been used as a coercive stick for a long time, to enforce things they have no constitutional authority to force directly.

      Two things I remember from the early 1980s are, auto emission inspections and picture drivers licenses (read, internal passports) in PA. With emission inspections, the General Assembly balked, and the cutting off of Transportation funds was threatened. They implemented the inspections, but initially set the fines for non-compliance at something like $3. The Feds said that was not good enough, and dictated a higher fine and penalties. Savor that; the Feds had no constitutional authority in the first place, yet wound up dictating even what the penalties for non-compliance were.

      They did the same thing to dictate picture drivers licenses. And now, early next year, my current drivers license is going to become inadequate ID to board an airplane or enter a federal building. As I said, an internal passport, just like my ex-Soviet relatives were once required to carry. Though in this case enforcement is implemented in the form of things we will be unable to do unless Our Papers Are In Order.

      So if the SCOTUS has said some things cannot be enforced by withholding of federal funding, I can think of a couple very old issues I would like to revisit. ;-)

  10. Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

    I’ve been banging the drum that VA is going to be the start of a boogaloo since the Dems won. Unlike In other states where it’s been decades of slow methodical removal of gun rights, VA Dems want to jackboot right now.

    • Brad says:

      Will the Virginia State Courts go along with the Democratic Party rush to extreme gun-control? What about the strong RKBA in the Virginia Constitution?

      • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

        Great question. I’m not familiar with the VA State Courts. If not, there is always the Federal Courts, who Trump has been successful at packing with potentially good justices.

      • mike w. says:

        Hah! Delaware has a strong RKBA, but democrats here could care less what the State Constitution says.

  11. 399 says:

    A couple years ago white supremacist groups like Identity Evropa, the Traditionalist Workers Party, and the Proud Boys were using “gun rights” and “open carry” rallies as fronts for their own recruiting. Speaking of Kent State, there was an attempt at an “open carry” rally there in September 2018 that was a front for white supremacists, but it was shut down by counter-protesters who knew who the participants were going to be.

    Those rallies have a dual purpose. They potentially recruit new members for the fascists, but also the protesters who are there to oppose white supremacy are represented to be “anti-gun” when that’s not why they are there at all. The Nazis then say “you gun owners are victims, just like us”. Fortunately most people see through it. There is a crossover between gun rights and white supremacy, but it’s a case of white supremacists trying to exploit the gun issue.

    • Sprocket says:

      Say hello to the leftie concern-troll everyone. Funny thing about the Proud Boys; they always seem to be more diverse than the pasty suburban basement dwellers arrayed against them. When folks like clown shoes here say “white supremacist” they mean anyone that holds European culture and values in high esteem, much like their friends at the SPLC and ADL.

      The left has decided on a strategy of racial and cultural identitarianism, with Anglo-Europeans being cast as the villains. This is useful for them in two ways. It attempts to establish whites as the other in their demographics is destiny immigration drive. It also establishes a basis for attacking the philosophical and cultural underpinnings of American, and Western in general, society. Perhaps if you’ve not been in a college classroom in a while or been on the left this seems fanciful. In my experience, it’s not.

      • 399 says:

        “When folks like clown shoes here say “white supremacist” they mean anyone that holds European culture and values in high esteem…”

        Congratulations on your command of the white supremacist line. I’d congratulate you on being a quick study, if that shit hadn’t been around since the Know Nothings. What brings you to a gun blog? Recruiting? This isn’t your first rodeo, is it?

    • Brad says:

      Oh I’ve seen the video footage of that Kent State event. And your statement is “but it was shut down by counter-protesters who knew who the participants were going to be”?

      Those masked antifa scum? Those “counter-protesters”? Who were practically rioting? Who tossed a dummy fragmentation hand grenade right into the middle of the pro-gun demonstrators? Who frightened the local police so much the police ordered the pro-gun demonstrators to leave?

      Is that your deal?

      • 399 says:

        “Those masked antifa scum? Those “counter-protesters”?”

        It appears there were also one or two students at that Kent State rally. But, those were some real sweeties pretending to speak for gun owners. What are those symbols in their tattoos? What was with that asshole in the knight costume and armor? Nothing says “gun owner” like someone in a knight costume with a sword, shield, and a tin shitpot on his head.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p-riVxbd_I

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp0r4SfS2ig

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltFP6fOia90

        Kaitlin Bennett who fronted for the white supremacists worked for Infowars. Does that tell you anything? What I resent is how successful those bastards were with identifying their bullshit with the gun rights movement. Did you catch that one TV news report calling them “the gun owners” over and over again? Bennett and her crew set up the “gun owner” fakery and the media was all too happy to play along.

        • Brad says:

          I’m hearing an awful lot about Bennett from you but not one word about Antifa.

          Are you Antifa? Were you one of those “counter-protesters” at Kent State? Are you one of those “John Brown Gun Club” types?

          • 399 says:

            If you mean, am I somebody who doesn’t like you guys infiltrating and exploiting the gun rights movement, I’ll admit to that and you can make of it what you will. I won’t confirm or deny where I was or what I was doing on September 29, 2018. Were you the guy with the shitpot on your head?

            • Brad says:

              Gotcha!

              Okay mister purifier, you’re busted. The odds of you being a phony game playing troll, or a calculating deliberate provocateur just went up dramatically. Which means further engagement with you is a waste of time.

              What gall, you accusing me of infiltration, considering you are the infiltrator trying to sow chaos here with your absurd accusations of ‘white supremacy’.

              I’ve been actively fighting for gun-rights since 1989. Which I suspect is longer than you have been alive. I’ve been commenting at Sebastians blog years longer than the name change.

              Now get lost you antifa scum. Haven’t you got some journalist to beat down? Or a passing Marine tourist? Got your trusty bike lock handy for some action? Or are you targeting some ICE facility for rifle attack like that other scumbag member of the John Brown Gun Club?

              Any enemy of the 1st Amendment like yourself, is no friend of the 2nd Amendment.

  12. RAH says:

    Reading the article It is one Democrat saying the Governor could use the State National Guard Not the Governor saying he would . I doubt Nordham is that stupid That is a good way to start actual shooting violence.

    • Richard says:

      His KKK picture would argue that he really is that stupid.

    • HappyWarrior6 says:

      It’s one or two, and they are congresscritters no less. How many rank and file VA delegates feel the same way except for the True Believers(tm)? Would they risk their seats (and lives, perhaps) for it?

    • Andy B. says:

      As a self-styled student of “tactics”, what I would expect would be a long period of “making examples of” victims one or two at a time, but nothing likely to cause a Lexington-Green-like confrontation. Eventually attrition would take over, and kids would want no parts of their eccentric late- or aged-parent’s guns and the legal hazards contained in them.

      I’m thinking for an analogy of old NFA weapons. An attorney friend of mine has several times found stashes of automatic weapons in attics while preparing for an estate sale, and the heirs always turn them over to the police.

      Changing what is defined as contraband, will not change how people deal with it — in my opinion.

      • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

        Except gun owners are wise to those tactics. Just look at the response to that guy in NY who claimed to be getting arrested for a mag ban and a red flag law. Gun owners were ready to starting flooding to NY.

        No examples won’t stop our response. It’ll just escalate and become a triggering situation. People will start attacking police stations. People will start attacking police, politicians, judges, and other complicit government officials.

        • Andy B. says:

          “Gun owners were ready to starting flooding to NY.”

          Apologies in advance, but that “flooding” keyed a flashback:

          When I was stationed in Germany there were two Army units in the town. Each cooperated with the other unit, but also regarded them as rivals.

          One evening I came in late from KP duty, and before I took my boots off, someone got on the PA system and announced, “The [other unit] has four of our guys cornered in the Citie Bar and is roughing them up. Anyone who wants to go kick some [other unit] ass, fall out in the company street!”

          The town was a crushingly boring place to be stationed, and because I didn’t need to get dressed again I was among the first out the door. I was in the first rank heading down the street for the Citie Bar. I was gratified to look over my shoulder and see at least 150 GIs flooding the street behind us. We went right up the middle, stopping traffic.

          When we got to the steps of the bar, I glanced over my shoulder. There may have been 150 guys still there, but they were strung out for a 1/2 mile along the street. Bit by bit they had thought better of what they were doing as they went down the street, and stopped. Six of us were all that went in the door to fight. I actually thought I might die, since there were at least 75 [other unit] GIs in there.

          We, with our guys who were already in there, won by the simple expedient of “shock and awe.” One of our opponents got his throat cut as soon as the action started. Everyone was so shocked, it gave us a chance to break out. The victim lived, but I almost got fingered for that. It was pure luck and the magic of crowd psychology that kept us from being IDed.

          When we busted out the door with our rescued buddies, those 150 GIs strung out along the street saw us running, and turned and ran too. To the last man.

          What I learned from that was to never depend on the physical courage of others, no matter how big the promised “flood.” And I’m not saying I had courage, because to the last second I thought I had 150 men with me.

          I once tried to render the above as a short story, that I titled “The Red Badge of Stupid,” but it sucked (as you see), and I never submitted it anywhere for publication.

          (Someday I’ll tell the story of going to a “mass [conservative] demonstration” and being the only demonstrator there; and being so-photographed, to be featured on the cover of the local newspaper.)

          • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

            Oh for sure some are keyboard warriors. But just look at the various Bundy standoffs out West. And that wasn’t even for an enumerated right! Just some dispute over land usage.

            Now imagine that movement but for gun rights. It doesn’t even take a large percentage of people to start wreaking havoc. It doesn’t even have to be public. Just offing “accidentally” certain people.

        • Andy B. says:

          I don’t want to belabor the issue — oh hell, yes I do, because cause-and-effect is important — as is “reality” — but it may depend on how closely the people in power studied what happened in Northern Ireland.

          I’m thinking of “Internment” that was begun in August 1971 and continued as policy through 1975. It essentially meant “imprisonment without trial”, often for as little as suspected political sympathies. That, escalated from the violent suppression of civil rights demonstrations that had been inspired by Civil Rights demonstrations in the U.S. South. The Brits thought they could escalate violence and oppression sufficient to discourage their opposition. Imagine if you can a Sir Bull Connors. ;-)

          It didn’t happen. Long Kesh prison variously became known as “Freedom University” and “University of Liberty,” etc., and “The Troubles” was a civil war that dragged on for thirty years in military stalemate. People were interned, then came out as hardened fighters.

          That’s why I’m reasonably convinced that major confrontation and overt political suppression will be avoided here. “The Troubles” went down in a First World scenario, very much like our society. Even if a “Lexington Green” scenario occurs accidentally, it will be backed away from by the authorities, for awhile, while the opposition leadership is eliminated slowly and probably covertly. Think COINTELPRO, which was already perfected more than 40 years ago.

          Of course all of my reasoning is predicated on the existence of entities capable of learning, as opposed to believing.

  13. rkh says:

    Having served for years in the 29th ID, it’s clear that Rep. Donald McEachin has no idea what’s he talking about. The guard doesn’t have the ability (much less motivation) to be gun control police. It’s just not what we do. Any guard mobilization to sanctuary counties would quickly turn into an extended BBQ event at various sheriffs’ offices. It’s ridiculous to even think about.

    • Stacy M says:

      Any guard mobilization to sanctuary counties would quickly turn into an extended BBQ event at various sheriffs’ offices. It’s ridiculous to even think about.

      Glad to hear that! I’d have a lot of fun visiting and hanging out…

  14. Brad says:

    Do the gun-control politicians of Virginia, who want to drag Virginia gun-control law from Texas to California levels overnight, essentially going from zero to ninety mph in seconds, have confidence they can bypass the Virginia Constitution? Is the Virginia judiciary so hostile to gun-rights they would abide such flagrant violation of the Virginia Constitution?

    Now I know such a thing has happened before in other States, as when the Colorado Supreme Court nullified the Colorado Constitution right to keep and bear arms. But can such a thing repeati itself in States like Virginia?

    • Joe says:

      The Democrats don’t care. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals is still a Leftist Majority Court, so the VA State Supreme Court is pretty much moot.

      • Brad says:

        State Law, State Constitution, State Court.

        No it is not moot. The Federal Courts have nothing to do with this, unless VA residents try to use the protection of the U.S. Constitution under the 14th Amendment.

  15. Bram says:

    “Alright men, go draw your M-16s from the armorer, then go to your houses, confiscate your own guns, and report back to me.”

    • Andy B. says:

      Flashback: When I was in the Army in Germany, we weren’t allowed to have ammunition. I think there was one clip of .45 ACP in the building because regulations required the CQ to have it while on duty. During the run-up to the Six Days War (which no one expected to be just Six Days) they brought in cases of ammo to load onto our gassed-up trucks and trailers. It focused our attention for a few days. Then we had to unload it and give it back.

      Anyway — I had bought a couple boxes of .308 sporting ammo, loaded them into M-14 magazines I swiped from guys who left them lying around, and hid the loaded mags in nooks and crannies in attics of the old German military buildings we occupied. I wasn’t going to carry a rifle I couldn’t use the way I wanted to use it, when the time came. (Not to digress, but we walked guard duty carrying lengths of galvanized iron water pipe wrapped with Army Green Tape as our only weapon.)

      I’m not aware that anyone else bought their own contraband ammo. I never met another Ex-GI who said he did, in similar circumstances. So I take your point, but I’m inclined to think GIs might very well confiscate their own guns if ordered to.

      In any case: Oral History, sort of.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » VA is for haters - […] politician discussing deploying the National Guard to enforce gun control. What could possibly go […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

top