Maybe we are a step ahead of the sheltered minds that would think that way. Personally I see most LE's and government parasites as, Citizen Haters. The very reason I'm not a government employee is because I can do better in the real world and want to be with like minded people who know that they have the abilities to take care of themselves. We don't need to stand on the shoulders of other people to keep our heads out of the water. Without question by far and large government parasites (which would be LE's too) have little or no respect to the citizens who are not in their club. I believe more and more people will come to understand this as time goes by.
I actually saw one of the self-described "pragmatics" claim that "If you try to take our guns, we will kill you" (and the like) is materially different from (and far worse than) "From my cold dead hands," because the first is a threat to kill, and the second is just a . . . vow to die, or something.
I understand what you mean. A person wishing to convey their sentiments about the 2nd Amendment often comes to a crossroad. How do I say what I want to say and get the message I want sent without somehow ending up on a government watch list of dangerous persons because the words I used were perceived as a personal threat by the reciever? In a letter to Chuck Schumer or Diane Feinstein one should be very careful in articulating a desire for the gun control wing of the Communist Party to just disappear.
As sensitive as the Chuck Schumers of this world are to their own survival, they are really sensitive to any dialogue that may suggest a threat to them has just been offerd.
Statements like "From my cold dead hands..." and "jack-booted thugs" are used to express one's willingness to fight back and to express our disdain without directly saying anything of a threatening nature to the intended audience.
The question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?
I believe that the message has been around for a long while. "From my cold dead hands" has been a credo for as long as I remember. The difference is subtle, but palpable. The "threepers" have shifted the message from "I'll die to protect my freedom" to "I'll kill you to protect my freedom".
Nope thats not the one, which I very well know the one of topic. Hint: David said one Second Amendment supporter used too many words a lot of time and would like to have a to the point answer in as few words as he could muster up. He received his answer. My hunch is we will hear from this man shortly and my hunch is he will repeat those very words.
RLS: Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?
I guess it depends on what you consider "looking bad". To the JBTs, we all "look bad" because we own guns and don't need their "protection". To the Rulers, we all look bad because we own guns and don't need to be Ruled. But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right.
[quote] The question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution? [/quote]
Those are mutually exclusive goals, Robert. We can either stand up for ourselves and take the risk that goes along with it, or we can remain silent and take the consequences of that.
Neither one is going to be safe. In the end, it isn't just "retribution" we have to fear.
Fearing that retribution, and so making no effort to defend yourself, you wind up just like the woman raped in a dark ally who believed the "authority" who told her just to give the criminal what they want and not resist.
I am anti-LE. Years of testilying, the War on Liberty In the Name of Drugs, tax collectors posing as law men, routine electronic torture of anyone that is inconvenient for them, jail or death sentences for Contempt of Cop -- you're damned right. I am anti-LE now, and they have made me this way.
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."
"For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States;"
Do those words sound familiar? They sound to me like we are living it again.
We're scaring people? Fucking-A we are scaring people. We've been running scared from them long enough. It is good for a government to fear its citizens. It is good for the ones who would trade essential freedoms for a little security to realize how little security they are getting in that deal.
This is the pragmatic view of what we should do (from SIH)
chris Said, January 16th, 2009 at 6:51 am
No mike, many people know that he will get confirmed no matter what we do… thus it would be rather pointless to fight it…
The fight for his nomination was lost on Nov. 5th… Beating the dead horse is pointless and a huge waste of time, effort and money.
But i suppose that until the NRA is standing en masse on the steps of the Capitol building firing shots into the air and screaming “shall not be infringed”… that you wont be happy.
Does anyone else notice what I commented about over there? Isn't he making the anti-gun argument here? The "you're getting raped, period. So just lay there and enjoy it!"
If Chris is an example of the people we should be appeasing and emulating...well, with friends like those who needs the jack boots?
After reading all the blogs where everybody got into a tinkling contest, I can't help but wonder that if all this energy was actually put towards good use, then, holy cow, we got a shot at holding our own, if not advancing gun rights over the next few years.
Well, I look at it like this. 'Jack booted thug' is a certain TYPE of law enforcement officer--the kind drunk on their own 'power' and oblivious to the rights of citizens.
I will continue to describe such persons as jack booted thugs--and they are thugs, for sure. Look at what they did at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
It is insulting to good law enforcement officers to be lumped in with the likes of these parasites on society. And thus, 'jack booted thugs' distinguishes the bad apples from good ones.
I agree with Welshman. I don't think there's much difference between the use of "Only Ones" and JBT. If they don't want to see that used, then they should forcibly evict the JBTs and "Only Ones" from their midst.
I feel no compulsion to be kind to those who would deem themselves to be my master just because it makes them unhappy when I call them what they are.
Welshman, I take your point. I do, on occassion, read about a LEO doing the right thing, and we, as gun owners, certainly understand what it's like to be on the receiving end of someone painting with too broad a brush. OTOH, all LEO's, and other employees of government entities, are what I generically refer to as "agents of the state". And no matter how decent they are otherwise, they are, with their own contriubution, enabling the functioning of the agencies which get only ever more oppressive.
For example, I've read people commenting favorably about how helpful the folks at the ATF technology branch are. But hey, why is it anyone should even have to inquire with them whether some thing is or is not permitted?
David, I'm sure I've read far fewer of those acrimonius threads than you, but I've certianly read too many, and been shocked at the vitriol expended on both sides. But hell if I know what the answer is.
I don't care for labels much myself. Don't why somebody felt he needed to invent "threeper" as a term of derision for those of us willing to speak the truth. We can either co-opt it or ignore it, I suppose. I prefer the latter.
KM said: "But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right."
Yep. The lesser-of-two-evils, Stepford-Republican "prags" over on Gunboards get upset when I ask, "If you wouldn't even stand up for your alleged principles in a VOTING BOOTH, why should anyone think you'd stand up when the king's redcoats start going door to door demanding our muskets?
[quote] "I guess it depends on what you consider "looking bad". To the JBTs, we all "look bad" because we own guns and don't need their "protection". To the Rulers, we all look bad because we own guns and don't need to be Ruled. But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right."
heh, I for one embrace the term threeper. That, to me, describes what I am feeling myself to be. I also agree with Welshman; Jack-Booted thug very well describes the less liberty oriented government enforcers who revel in their power, who cover up their mistakes (and let good citizens to go prison or worse), and who would just as soon see you lying in the gutter bleeding out as look at you.
As to the comment: "The question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?"
Mama Liberty put it perfectly, the two are mutually exclusive. I've become reconciled to the possibility that for speaking out I will be targeted for silencing at some point. I'm not saying I'm important enough in the scheme of things (I'm certainly not a Mike V. or a David, or one of the many other well read bloggers out there) to warrant said attention, but I understand that the possibility exists that I may at some point say something, or point out something that may get the wrong sort of attention.
What will be will be. In the mean time, I'll speak up and fight for what I believe in until I am prevented from doing so. I have a line in the sand, and I'll stick to it.
The truth of the matter is that nomatter what we say, collectively we will always be "nuts" to the left and left wing controlled media. I do understand wanting to tone down the rhetoric but still wanting to express our stand on the subject. Tell them the truth, I say
"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992
or paraphase it this way...."If you dont have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
Regardless, we are at a crossroads here people. The NRA has capitulated. Could it be time for us to stop supporting those that take our money and write a letter only. We all know what we want, dont we? Maybe the time is at hand to do more for ourselves and create an organization that has not been so in "tune" with DC that it has forgotten why it exists in the first place.
It is hard to vote out the tyrants but organizations need cash and right now we still control that so demonstrate your displeasure. That way we can come up with a motto that works for us.
As far as the jsck booted thugs...if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then....
Actually, in many cases, when fighting for a political cause, bad publicity is better than no publicity or even lesser good publicity. This is why terrorism became popular in the 80s. It was cheap, effective advertising for political causes. Yeah, we thought the Palestinians were the bad guys after they kidnapped an airplane, but at least we realized there was a problem and starting thinking about how to constructively solve it.
I think it's safe to assume the government will do what it pleases, and talking about "threepers" isn't going to suddenly result in a crack-down they couldn't have arranged for anyway. If "threepers" gets on the news though, good. Most people don't even know there is a gun control debate going on at all. The more eyes you attract, even if you do it by being a little offensive, the better. It all comes down to numbers.
(Just try not to directly offend, attack or threaten the individual voter such that it polarizes them. Or maybe do.)
I sent something to Orrin "Benedict Arnold should be marched to a wall blindfolded" Hatch, as I referred to him in the email with my home address on it and phone contact info and a reference to looking forward to some day pissing on his grave if he helps confirm Holder. I'll keep you posted on if that impacts my life any as long as I continue to be a free man.
I've said such things to politicians before and I can still buy guns according to the FBI.
Wasn't a threat, I just suggested us Texan gun owners would look forward to pissing on his grave when he passed on.
Angels on a pin but they aren't angels that put me in prison yet.
I also suggested I'd do everything in my pwoer to make him so Toxic on capitol Hill that barney Frank wouldn't even accept a free BJ from him anymore.
Maybe we are a step ahead of the sheltered minds that would think that way.
ReplyDeletePersonally I see most LE's and government parasites as, Citizen Haters.
The very reason I'm not a government employee is because I can do better in the real world and want to be with like minded people who know that they have the abilities to take care of themselves. We don't need to stand on the shoulders of other people to keep our heads out of the water.
Without question by far and large government parasites (which would be LE's too) have little or no respect to the citizens who are not in their club. I believe more and more people will come to understand this as time goes by.
I actually saw one of the self-described "pragmatics" claim that "If you try to take our guns, we will kill you" (and the like) is materially different from (and far worse than) "From my cold dead hands," because the first is a threat to kill, and the second is just a . . . vow to die, or something.
ReplyDeleteI wish I could remember where I saw that.
I understand what you mean. A person wishing to convey their sentiments about the 2nd Amendment often comes to a crossroad. How do I say what I want to say and get the message I want sent without somehow ending up on a government watch list of dangerous persons because the words I used were perceived as a personal threat by the reciever? In a letter to Chuck Schumer or Diane Feinstein one should be very careful in articulating a desire for the gun control wing of the Communist Party to just disappear.
ReplyDeleteAs sensitive as the Chuck Schumers of this world are to their own survival, they are really sensitive to any dialogue that may suggest a threat to them has just been offerd.
Statements like "From my cold dead hands..." and "jack-booted thugs" are used to express one's willingness to fight back and to express our disdain without directly saying anything of a threatening nature to the intended audience.
The question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?
45, perhaps you refer to this?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the message has been around for a long while. "From my cold dead hands" has been a credo for as long as I remember. The difference is subtle, but palpable. The "threepers" have shifted the message from "I'll die to protect my freedom" to "I'll kill you to protect my freedom".
Nope thats not the one, which I very well know the one of topic.
ReplyDeleteHint: David said one Second Amendment supporter used too many words a lot of time and would like to have a to the point answer in as few words as he could muster up. He received his answer.
My hunch is we will hear from this man shortly and my hunch is he will repeat those very words.
RLS:
ReplyDeleteJust how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?
I can't speak for others, but I send WarOnGuns BiteMeGrams...
I guess it depends on what you consider "looking bad". To the JBTs, we all "look bad" because we own guns and don't need their "protection". To the Rulers, we all look bad because we own guns and don't need to be Ruled. But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right.
ReplyDelete[quote]
ReplyDeleteThe question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?
[/quote]
Those are mutually exclusive goals, Robert. We can either stand up for ourselves and take the risk that goes along with it, or we can remain silent and take the consequences of that.
Neither one is going to be safe. In the end, it isn't just "retribution" we have to fear.
Fearing that retribution, and so making no effort to defend yourself, you wind up just like the woman raped in a dark ally who believed the "authority" who told her just to give the criminal what they want and not resist.
Sometimes what they want is for you to die.
I am anti-LE. Years of testilying, the War on Liberty In the Name of Drugs, tax collectors posing as law men, routine electronic torture of anyone that is inconvenient for them, jail or death sentences for Contempt of Cop -- you're damned right. I am anti-LE now, and they have made me this way.
ReplyDelete"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."
"For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States;"
Do those words sound familiar? They sound to me like we are living it again.
We're scaring people? Fucking-A we are scaring people. We've been running scared from them long enough. It is good for a government to fear its citizens. It is good for the ones who would trade essential freedoms for a little security to realize how little security they are getting in that deal.
This is the pragmatic view of what we should do (from SIH)
ReplyDeletechris Said,
January 16th, 2009 at 6:51 am
No mike, many people know that he will get confirmed no matter what we do… thus it would be rather pointless to fight it…
The fight for his nomination was lost on Nov. 5th… Beating the dead horse is pointless and a huge waste of time, effort and money.
But i suppose that until the NRA is standing en masse on the steps of the Capitol building firing shots into the air and screaming “shall not be infringed”… that you wont be happy.
Does anyone else notice what I commented about over there? Isn't he making the anti-gun argument here? The "you're getting raped, period. So just lay there and enjoy it!"
If Chris is an example of the people we should be appeasing and emulating...well, with friends like those who needs the jack boots?
I have to agree.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading all the blogs where everybody got into a tinkling contest, I can't help but wonder that if all this energy was actually put towards good use, then, holy cow, we got a shot at holding our own, if not advancing gun rights over the next few years.
Just my thoughts, your mileage may vary.....
Pragmatists are hand-wringing pussies...period!
ReplyDeleteThey are the ones hurting the cause by appeasing the masters at every turn. And *uck the NRA!
They'll have a JACK BOOT stepping on their face forever. I myself would rather die than live that nightmare.
I think I'm being clear.
Well, I look at it like this. 'Jack booted thug' is a certain TYPE of law enforcement officer--the kind drunk on their own 'power' and oblivious to the rights of citizens.
ReplyDeleteI will continue to describe such persons as jack booted thugs--and they are thugs, for sure. Look at what they did at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
It is insulting to good law enforcement officers to be lumped in with the likes of these parasites on society. And thus, 'jack booted thugs' distinguishes the bad apples from good ones.
I agree with Welshman. I don't think there's much difference between the use of "Only Ones" and JBT. If they don't want to see that used, then they should forcibly evict the JBTs and "Only Ones" from their midst.
ReplyDeleteI feel no compulsion to be kind to those who would deem themselves to be my master just because it makes them unhappy when I call them what they are.
Welshman, I take your point. I do, on occassion, read about a LEO doing the right thing, and we, as gun owners, certainly understand what it's like to be on the receiving end of someone painting with too broad a brush. OTOH, all LEO's, and other employees of government entities, are what I generically refer to as "agents of the state". And no matter how decent they are otherwise, they are, with their own contriubution, enabling the functioning of the agencies which get only ever more oppressive.
ReplyDeleteFor example, I've read people commenting favorably about how helpful the folks at the ATF technology branch are. But hey, why is it anyone should even have to inquire with them whether some thing is or is not permitted?
David, I'm sure I've read far fewer of those acrimonius threads than you, but I've certianly read too many, and been shocked at the vitriol expended on both sides. But hell if I know what the answer is.
I don't care for labels much myself. Don't why somebody felt he needed to invent "threeper" as a term of derision for those of us willing to speak the truth. We can either co-opt it or ignore it, I suppose. I prefer the latter.
I just wish I were getting more range time.
KM said: "But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right."
ReplyDeleteYep. The lesser-of-two-evils, Stepford-Republican "prags" over on Gunboards get upset when I ask, "If you wouldn't even stand up for your alleged principles in a VOTING BOOTH, why should anyone think you'd stand up when the king's redcoats start going door to door demanding our muskets?
[quote]
ReplyDelete"I guess it depends on what you consider "looking bad". To the JBTs, we all "look bad" because we own guns and don't need their "protection". To the Rulers, we all look bad because we own guns and don't need to be Ruled. But, to me, the pragmatists look bad because they won't stand up for what is right."
I agree. Nicely said.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteheh, I for one embrace the term threeper. That, to me, describes what I am feeling myself to be. I also agree with Welshman; Jack-Booted thug very well describes the less liberty oriented government enforcers who revel in their power, who cover up their mistakes (and let good citizens to go prison or worse), and who would just as soon see you lying in the gutter bleeding out as look at you.
ReplyDeleteAs to the comment: "The question still remains; Just how does the little guy, who can easily find himself the object of attention by the Eric Holders of the world, express anything to his government without fear or retribution?"
Mama Liberty put it perfectly, the two are mutually exclusive. I've become reconciled to the possibility that for speaking out I will be targeted for silencing at some point. I'm not saying I'm important enough in the scheme of things (I'm certainly not a Mike V. or a David, or one of the many other well read bloggers out there) to warrant said attention, but I understand that the possibility exists that I may at some point say something, or point out something that may get the wrong sort of attention.
What will be will be. In the mean time, I'll speak up and fight for what I believe in until I am prevented from doing so. I have a line in the sand, and I'll stick to it.
The sarcasm is just oh so cute...
ReplyDeleteThe truth of the matter is that nomatter what we say, collectively we will always be "nuts" to the left and left wing controlled media. I do understand wanting to tone down the rhetoric but still wanting to express our stand on the subject. Tell them the truth, I say
ReplyDelete"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992
or paraphase it this way...."If you dont have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
Regardless, we are at a crossroads here people. The NRA has capitulated. Could it be time for us to stop supporting those that take our money and write a letter only. We all know what we want, dont we? Maybe the time is at hand to do more for ourselves and create an organization that has not been so in "tune" with DC that it has forgotten why it exists in the first place.
It is hard to vote out the tyrants but organizations need cash and right now we still control that so demonstrate your displeasure. That way we can come up with a motto that works for us.
As far as the jsck booted thugs...if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then....
If not then treat them with respect.
...if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then...
ReplyDeleteOr "If the jackboot fits . . . "
Actually, in many cases, when fighting for a political cause, bad publicity is better than no publicity or even lesser good publicity. This is why terrorism became popular in the 80s. It was cheap, effective advertising for political causes. Yeah, we thought the Palestinians were the bad guys after they kidnapped an airplane, but at least we realized there was a problem and starting thinking about how to constructively solve it.
ReplyDeleteI think it's safe to assume the government will do what it pleases, and talking about "threepers" isn't going to suddenly result in a crack-down they couldn't have arranged for anyway. If "threepers" gets on the news though, good. Most people don't even know there is a gun control debate going on at all. The more eyes you attract, even if you do it by being a little offensive, the better. It all comes down to numbers.
(Just try not to directly offend, attack or threaten the individual voter such that it polarizes them. Or maybe do.)
here, here...
ReplyDeleteThis debates needs to get brought to public attention with the right light on it.
I sent something to Orrin "Benedict Arnold should be marched to a wall blindfolded" Hatch, as I referred to him in the email with my home address on it and phone contact info and a reference to looking forward to some day pissing on his grave if he helps confirm Holder. I'll keep you posted on if that impacts my life any as long as I continue to be a free man.
ReplyDeleteI've said such things to politicians before and I can still buy guns according to the FBI.
Wasn't a threat, I just suggested us Texan gun owners would look forward to pissing on his grave when he passed on.
Angels on a pin but they aren't angels that put me in prison yet.
I also suggested I'd do everything in my pwoer to make him so Toxic on capitol Hill that barney Frank wouldn't even accept a free BJ from him anymore.
I can be mouthy when you mess with my freedoms.
Senators love me!
i can't help but notice that sipsey st. irregulars has twice as many blog followers now as it did when it began.
ReplyDelete