re: Democrats Propose Bill to Neuter Militias

quote:

---

If fascist white supremacists want to train in the woods on how to overthrow the government, you better believe the government is going to try to stop it. Does that even need to be said?

---

Again, the underlying conduct they're trying to restrict is legal. It's not illegal to call for the overthrow of the government. It's not illegal to own weapons. It's not illegal to gather on private property and participate in training drills. By your own statements, the justification for regulating this kind of conduct is simply the political viewpoints of the participants. This is clearly viewpoint discrimination, which the Supreme Court has routinely found to violate the First Amendment. I don't think this is a Second Amendment issue as much as it is a First Amendment one.

quote:

---

If fascist white supremacists

---

quote:

---

A well regulated militia does require drill,

---

Men call this a "gun range."

quote:

---

It's not illegal to call for the overthrow of the government

---

It is if ity's a call to violently overthrow the government.

The fact is that I don't really have a strong opinion on whether or not groups of people should be able to drill as a militia.

What I do have a strong opinion on is that I don't want fascist white supremacist paramilitary militias training in the woods on how to conduct an armed overthrow of the government just because their man didn't get elected.

Let me be clear, I don't even want marxist black supremacist paramilitary militias training in the woods on how to overthrow the government. But there aren't any of those posting on this board.

And you keep talking about what is and isn't legal currently, but the whole point of the thread is discussing what may or may not be legal in the future. And I'm here to tell you that the government will move against fascist white supremacist paramilitary militias training in the woods on how to conduct an armed overthrow of the government. And they will do so in a lawful manner.

quote:

---

I know you white supremacists

---

Wait…you ACTUALLY believe Biden?

quote:

---

I feel differently.

---

Let's see...

quote:

---

I think the existence of non-violent fringe groups is proof that our Constitutional rights are at least partially intact.

---

I agree.

quote:

---

I want an America full of Patriots and flat earth moon bats and everything in between, all living beyond the coercive appetites of hangry unelected bureaucrats.

---

I do as well.

quote:

---

Organize, exercise your rights and head to the woods

---

He's where we diverge. Head to the fricking woods? Head to the fricking POLLS! That's how we do it in this country. If you don't want to do it that way, move to a different country.

quote:

---

If not, every Muslim mosque should be "moved against" tomorrow by Federal agents.

---

So we diverge here as well. frick ALL religions. But, because I am a patriot, I will abide by the law of the land and support the free exercise of religion. All or none.

quote:

---

Because my list of those who might overthrow the government is entirely superior to your list.

---

Now you're just being weird. If there are armed groups of muzzies training in the woods to overthrow the government, I will not accept that as a tenet of their religion, and would accept the government rounding them up. Under your rules, they would be well within their rights to train in our country to overthrow it. I disagree with you there.

All in all, though, we agree on much if not all.

quote:

---

If there are armed groups of muzzies training in the woods to overthrow the government,

---

This is an assumption. Unless it is documented (and overt).

Otherwise, it seems rather bigoted.

Sure we agree on stuff. But you seem to be missing the essence of my post. You believe that YOU get to decide the definition of these things. That's my point. For instance, you've decided that they want to "overthrow the government". You've also assigned violent intentions to them. And of course you've also designed a false choice (go the polls vs right to assemble, right to free speech, right to bear arms, etc). They probably prefer to do BOTH. These Americans have decided that they don't need your approval to exercise their rights.

quote:

---

can he have the military (arbitrarily and without penalty) kill them?

---

As long as we are "what iffing", sure


But no one believes the military would follow that order.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If there are armed groups of muzzies training in the woods to overthrow the government,

---

This is an assumption. Unless it is documented (and overt).

---

It's a conditional, hypothetical statement, not an assumption. The key here is the use of the conjunction, "if".

Besides which, isn't that how the supposed Sept. 11 attackers did it, trained in this country? frick that noise.

quote:

---

Otherwise, it seems rather bigoted.

---

So? It's not unlawful for a private citizen to be bigoted. I already stated it outright when I said, " frick ALL religions." above.

I find that the older I get, the less tolerant of religion I become - whether it's the Jews, Muzzies or Jesus freaks. But I still support their right to be idiots in this country, until they start training to overthrow us. Then, frick 'em.