Kyle Rittenhouse Testimony Live

Why would you follow it? Michigan has a pistol registry, and anyone worth their salt doesn’t follow it. It’s forced speech to announce you are practicing your 2nd. I fail to understand time and time again why you need permission from your government to do anything? Do you think Rosa Parks asked permission to defy segregation?

Is that directed to me?
I think that you missed the point of my posts?

Every so called “gun law” is unconstitutional!

The very word … PERMIT makes me Scream!

Okay so why do you or anyone else follow unconstitutional laws?
I feel like it’s a must to break those laws as frequently as possible.
Libertarian Activist Group called WeAreChange breaks those laws on the regular and sets case law and gets those laws overturned. I fish without permits, I’ll set fireworks off when I feel like it, if they wanna charge me which they sometimes do I’ll waste time in court until acquitted/dismissed. I’m a pro-se expert of sorts. I watch case law history for fun. One of my favorite channels is Audit The Audit on youtube. Really what I’m trying to say is why do you care what the government thinks, heroin addicts still shoot heroin… your admitted you have less courage than a heroin addict to assert your natural law rights. Man was made to hunt, fish, sharpen tools, explore, think.

People follow these “laws” out of fear of the Stasi … look it up.

Unfortunately we as a whole, fear spending the rest of our lives in jail.

Either that or financial ruin.

If you believe that some organization, even ones, chock full of lawyers are beyond persecution … You haven’t been paying attention!

It would take a full blown civil war … against the government and wacky, Marxist neighbors to overcome what has happened to this once free nation!

Unfortunately, I believe we are far beyond that!
People have become too comfortable in following … even unconstitutional laws, approved by courts.
You know: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

To sum up …
“Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.”

John Basil Barnhill

You should watch the film the police people, they get right up in the polices face try to get them to blow up cause they have big egos. Camera’s change a lot. You got to look up the max consequences of the law your willing to break see if you can eat that sentence worst case scenario. Get in touch with a local lawyer or law firm that specializes in whatever issue your looking to do. Stoners always had stoner lawyers, 2A people have lawyers that specialize in that. You gotta stop being afraid of whatever laws in your state stop you from exercising your rights. Work to change those laws at the ballot box. I’m all for a Right to Hunt, and Fish amendment here we don’t have one.

I’ve never met a real life Marxist I’ve seen some who proclaim it online, and on websites that cater to that. My sister dated a Neo-Nazi he tried to downplay the ironcross on his chest but he was never ok with minorities and that whole proud white boy attitude. What you live in The Bay Area or Hyde Park?

You seem to be lost as to the purposes of my posts?
I have not been referring to myself or to any fear that I have … for myself!

It is the country that I fear for.
Again, you have not been paying attention to the tyranny that has taken hold in this country!

If You Believe that lawyers will save your hide … on the way to the gulag … go read up on the J6 Political Prisoners that sit in the bowels of the Washington dungeons!

No, I don’t fear for myself.
I fear for my children and their children.
I fear for my country!

1 Like

Dude like the Anti-fa and BLM folks they kind of broke an actual constitutional law. They often plea down to trespassing. This isn’t a case of failure to register a pistol, or fishing without a permit, or copyright infringement.

First of all, you should go to [ https://www.twilightpatriot.com/2021/08/revolution-within-form-it-can-happen.html ] and you’ll find a very eloquent, closely-reasoned affirmation of what you believe. It’s all the more impressive because it’s written by a frighteningly-intelligent 20 year old.

I think there is an inherent problem with having a system that has a constiution, or ‘organic law’ as it is called elsewhere, that takes a super-majority to amend, and courts that can review legislation and annul it if in the court’s opinion in violates that constitution. It’s just the problem of trying to restrain democracy within republican boundaries. Beyond my pay grade to go further.

But … if we choose not to comply with an unjust law, or government directive, we have to be smart about how we do it. If the Left succeed in passing a law saying that all semi-auto long arms must be turned in, or worse, we should not comply. (In the current state of affairs, we should not comply. I can conceive of a situation in which we should comply, but I don’t things in the US will get to that point without a massive upheaval.)

HOW we craft our non-compliance is another matter. If we have a large fraction of the population with us and ready to stand up to the government, that’s one thing. If we don’t, we might have to non-comply by having our weapons have an unfortunate boating accident.

[Side note: if things look like moving towards mass confiscation of firearms, before this happens, every patriot should collect a few dozen tin cans, and then go to public parks, vacant lots, their own back yards, and bury them in half a dozen or so narrow shallow trenches, a couple of dozen in a line… Other unwanted metal objects that can be arranged in a narrow line also qualify. The seeds of liberty.]

It’s just a question of tactics. If the police knock on your door at 4am … politely let them in. Don’t grab your rifle and start a shoot-out, and give them an excuse to kill you, as happened to Duncan Lemp less than two years ago.

I think that when we contemplate any action, there are three considerations we have to keep in mind:
Moral, Legal, and Tactical.

If something is immoral, we shouldn’t do it.

It might be moral, but not legal. Then we have to consider the consequences of doing it. I might consider it morally justified to shoot dead someone spraypainting my garage door with communist symbols. But if I do, I will probably go to prison for a long time. So I wouldn’t do it.

It might be moral, and legal, but tactically unwise at that time. We’re in a war, and right now the main battleground is for the minds of the broad middle of American society.

So I can see a situation where it might be moral, and legal (in a state with juries with common sense) to shoot dead someone, but not tactically smart to do so. We don’t control the media, and do a poor job of reaching out beyond those who are already believers, and this must be taken into account. (The current blatant distortion in the coverage of the Rittenhouse trial – embarrassing even some of the more honest Leftists – is a case in point.)

The key thing is always to think, how will this action of mine affect the fortunes of my side, in the war we’re in. Doing something might make me feel good, but will it be at the expense of the fortunes of the side I support.

Note that the same action done by a few scattered isolated individuals is going to be very different than the same action carried out by hundreds of thousands. When we are strong enough to lead mass actions, we’ll be in a different tactical position than we are right now.

Were I in the military, and every unit got orders to attend Racial Sensitivity Awareness Training, led by Al Sharpton … I would have to make a choice. If we have done our job right, and with a bit of luck, we might be able to organize a mass refusal by several million servicemen. But if it’s just a few hundred scattered around the world who refuse, and get Bad Conduct Discharges … we’ve shafted ourselves.

Because we WANT to have our people inside the military, even if they have to put up with some PC nonsense. (That’s also why we should be on Twitter and Facebook and all the other places they don’t want us to be.)

The Southern Civil Rights movement would have been morally justified in using violence to achieve its aims. But they were smart, and achieved their aims largely non-violently. (‘Largely’, I say, because the threat of violence, were the local bigots not restrained, was always there, although nowadays it’s played down by the educational system. But look up ‘Deacons for Defense and Justice’ ((in support of which I played a microscopic role)) to see what was happening behind the scenes.)

Good! So would I and so would every principled conservative. But that qualifying adjective is important.

A law is only as good as it is enforced. How many people would want to report that activity? I smoked pot from 2005-2010 I was surprised when people would Narc on me only to legalize it in 2018 by massive margins. I’d put it this way, no matter what the law is on guns, they are only good as they are enforced. The only time they are enforced here. From what I have seen is when it is used by a felon in the commission of a crime. All my neighbors have guns, as do we. My neighbor has a plaque that says he will shot because it takes 2 seconds while police can take 2 to 20 minutes. He has every right to defend his family, and property against unlawfulness. Bernie Sanders is pro 2nd A.

Opponents Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley attacked Sanders’s past votes against a bill in 1993 that established national background checks in and for votes in 2003 and 2005 that protects gun companies from lawsuits if their products are used in crimes. Sanders, an independent from rural and gun-friendly Vermont.

Cali & Minorities democrats are more against the gun thing. Midwestern & Northern North Eastern are used to having voters who own guns. Nebraska has worse gun prohibitions than Vermont. Come to bear country you might think different.

Yes, I think gun control, like teaching CRT in the schools, is a weak point for the Left, and one we should exploit ruthlessly.

There is an argument to be had, among patriots, about just how much control over deadly weapons we should cede to the government.

Given the rotten nature of our own, dominated by the Left, there is a tendency among our side to go all the way towards anarchism, or at least ‘minarchism’.

I think this is profoundly mistaken. Our rights are not given to us by government – they are antecedent of it. But they must be secured. And “… to secure these rights , Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

My ‘rights’ mean nothing, if a group of Islamists near me import a nuclear weapon bought from a corrupt Pakistani government official (and there are no other kind) and set it off. So I want some legal basis for the government to be able to prevent this. Likewise with their ability to manufacture high explosives. If they are American citizens, they must have the same right to own weapons that I do … but if their allegiance is really to a religion/ideology that wants me dead, I want the government to have the ability, legally, to keep a very close eye on them.

But what is sauce for the Islamist goose is also sauce for the patriotic gander.

There is no ideal solution to these dilemmas. We need government, we need restrictions on government – at least until either we are all angels, or we are governed by angels, as the man said.

So while I’m against the government’s taking away my AR15, I am not against its taking away, or prohibiting, my ability to construct a massively-destructive device – explosives, or nerve gas.

But then this gives the government the heavy weapons, because THEY have massively-destructive devices … tanks, A10s, … atom bombs.

Again, there is no ideal solution except … patriots need to be in, or as close as possible to, the military as possible.

Every patriot under the age of 36 who has not done his military service yet should enlist in the National Guard.

And every patriotic group should seek ways to have as close contact as possible with both the local police, and the military, even if it’s just being a volunteer at the local USO. Where ‘Back the Blue’ groups or their equivalent do not exist, we should start them.

In an ideal society, we would make it much easier for citizens to take part in their military/police formations. (Hell, in my ideal society no one but veterans would be allowed to vote.) But in the meantime, we have to use the channels we have.

@Unitedwestand, the more I read your posts, the more I think that there is a place for you in the Republican Party. The current Democrat leadership in Washington doesn’t care about working Americans.

They pay lip service to the unions because they have been an important part of the get out the Democrat vote for many years. Yet they trash the union members with vaccine mandates that could cost you your job and open borders which are going to drive down wages and pose unlimited burdens on middle class people. These illegals are going to have to be feed, housed and paid welfare. Their kids can’t speak English which will burden our already over taxed public education system. The worst of these illegals will be criminals who will hurt lower class Americans the most.

These “limousine liberals” won’t have to worry about the mess they are creating because they get rich from their government connections, hire security firms to keep them safe and send their kids to private schools. In other words, you pay, and they live off your misery. They will only listen to your concerns if you have money and economic influence to offer them.

If you think I’m wrong look at the prices for energy, especially gasoline. Biden doesn’t care about you and your problems. All he’s concerned about is ramming though as much of the extreme Democrat agenda before the Democrats lose their majority in Congress. Some Democrats think that they will buy votes with their $1.7 trillion socialist bill. Given their inability to manage these gigantic programs properly, that is highly doubtful. Passage of that bill will make the beginning of massive fraud and corruption coupled with massive inflation which will crush the value of the dollar and take people’s savings with it.

Biden is the cruelest, most uncaring President that I have ever seen. He is more incompetent than Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter, and as cold and mean spirited as Richard Nixon. Biden is well on his way to becoming the worst President ever.

Lyndon Johnson incompetent??? The Master of the Senate! Nixon cold? (Mean-spirited, maybe. A bit nuts, for sure. But just the man to turn American foreign policy 180 degrees around on China, dumping 25 years of hard-core anti-Communism Mao-is-the-greatest-mass-murderer-of-all-time rhetoric in the garbage can … precisely because he was amoral.)

Biden is an accident of history, a symetrical historical joke against us just as Trump was and is. If I believed in the supernatural, I would think it/he/she/they were punishing us for hubris after winning the Cold War.

But your main point is absolutely correct. There must be many people like UnitedWeStand in the Democratic ranks, even if not so articulate. But we need a Republican Party that can welcome them … or one that is willing to give up the name and create a new political party with people like Tulsi Gabbard. It’s what professor Buckley argued for in his book with the provocative title, the Republican Workers Party: [ https://www.amazon.com/Republican-Workers-Party-Victory-Everyone/dp/1641770066/ ] Personally, I’d call it the “Democratic-Republican Party”, which has a very sound pedigree [https://www.thoughtco.com/democratic-republican-party-4135452]

History doesn’t provide much room for optimism here, but we should follow the advice of Romaine Rolland, or maybe it was Antonio Gramsci, and have ‘pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will.’

But in the meantime, get that AR15 and accessories and start organizing with likeminded neighbors, in case it’s ““Après Joe, le déluge””.

You bet he was. Johnson got the biggest election mandate in 1964 since FDR in 1936. He threw that away on the Vietnam War and pushed through his “Great Society” program, which did more to break up Black families than any factor since slavery. By 1968 Johnson was so unpopular that he was forced to withdraw from running for another term.

Johnson was a big wheel in the Senate, but he wasn’t up to the presidency. Like Nancy Pelosi in the House, he could crack the whip over the Senators’ heads, but as President, he was a bust, and very bad one.

As for Nixon, he was a master of foreign policy, except for the Vietnam quagmire. Foreign policy was his wheelhouse. As for domestic policy, he only played one side against the other for his political advantage. Nixon was cold and power hungry. In the end, he viewed himself as “a king” and even went so far as to call himself “the sovereign” after he left office.

Believe me, I am and was no fan of Lyndon Johnson. I can remember wearing a ‘Scratch Lyndon Twice’ button during … some sort of primary election (?) which liberal Democrats in Texas (of which I was one) were contesting.

But … it would have taken a giant not to wade into the Big Muddy. I know there is a story that JFK was considering getting out – after he had had the current President there murdered – but I don’t believe it. Not politically possible, not even thinkable for Cold War America then.

And as for the Great Society – yes, in retrospect, and with the help of Charles Murray, we can see what a disaster it was. And even that Democrat Senator from New York whose name I forget started to see it … but at the time, it would have taken a political genius to see that the USA was not like Sweden, culturally, and that what worked there might not work in South Chicago. (Although the Swedes seem to have forgotten this, and think that they can turn Somalis into Swedes. A tragedy.)

I know this seems obvious now but it was not then. In Murray’s Losing Ground, he talks about how phrases that later become commonplace among both liberals and conservatives – like “unintended consequences” – were just not part of the vocabulary then.

Now, I know that there were politicians who understood this about the Great Society, even then. One of them even ran for President on the Republican ticket in 1964 – and got roundly trounced. [I recall that my grandmother was going to vote for Goldwater, until my liberal Democrat mother told her that he wanted to take away the old peoples’ Social Security. That was true enough in principle, although of course it (probably) wouldn’t have happened in practice … but it did the trick.]

As you probably know, even then, the MSM was partisan, hinting that Goldwater was mentally ill. A bunch of leftist psychiatrists signed a public statement asserting this. Horrible, since he was probably one of the most personally decent men the American Right has ever had. Would we had a Goldwater today!

I like her because she doesn’t want the forever wars. She learned the same lesson everyone on the right learned that we can’t export democracy, and the democrats claimed they were antiwar.

Sounds a little Fascist. Look at the American Solidarity Party Platform. If you guys would have let Trump be Trump on healthcare he would of passed single payer by whipping his party and various pressure groups whipping ours.

The best thing Johnson got passed was the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It addressed some very fundamental forms of bigotry, but even it became a mixed bag. For many Democrats on the bench, enforcement became quotas, which resulted in discrimination based on race and gender. It’s become the cornerstone for Democrat political strategy

Yes, this is true. But you have to remember that conservatism is a disposition, not an ideology … but ideologies are comforting things to have, because they’re like formulas in physics: put in the numbers, turn the crank, there’s your answer.

And the people with the ideology most congruent to conservatism are the Libertarians, with whom many conservatives share some impulses … plus they’re convenient to have when we’re trying to fight our corner among young people, being a kind of ‘conservatism with a human face’. So we borrow their economics.

My own solution is to decree total Universal Conscription of the entire American people, so that everyone is a veteran, and then expand the VA system.

Expand on the VA System?

Nothing like doubling down on system that fails regularly except when truly committed people are trying to fix it.

Oh yes, I know all about the VA.
But if we were all its victims, we might then be able to change it.