One-third of Americans believe armed ...

One-third of Americans believe armed revolution imperative

There are 482 comments on the Examiner.com story from May 12, 2013, titled One-third of Americans believe armed revolution imperative. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

With citizens concerned about new and stricter gun control legislation, a new poll found more than one-third of Americans believe an armed revolution might need to occur in the next few years to prevent an escalating war against constitutional liberties.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#428 May 26, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
< 1787.
Waitress:...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#429 May 26, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
- Thomas Jefferson,
Owned 600 human beings and did not think blacks and people who did not own property should have firearms.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#430 May 26, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Owned 600 human beings and did not think blacks and people who did not own property should have firearms.
Projecting again, eh traitor-troll? Think you're confusing him with demonRats.
spocko

Oakland, CA

#431 May 26, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not quite, traitor.
For you see the second amendment was DEMANDED by We The People .
Not exactly, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, Robert Morris were the “Financiers of the American Revolution.” Nearly all were well educated for their time, they all had prosperous enterprises while attending to the people’s business. Many of the Founding Fathers lobbied against the Bill of Rights. Most of the Founding Fathers disapproved of giving ordinary citizens the right to own land or such liberties as freedom of religion, freedom from unreasonable search and torture, the right of free speech -- for you the rabble.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#432 May 26, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Not exactly, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, Robert Morris were the “Financiers of the American Revolution.” Nearly all were well educated for their time, they all had prosperous enterprises while attending to the people’s business. Many of the Founding Fathers lobbied against the Bill of Rights. Most of the Founding Fathers disapproved of giving ordinary citizens the right to own land or such liberties as freedom of religion, freedom from unreasonable search and torture, the right of free speech -- for you the rabble.
That might be the case in the mind of a treasonous demonRat sycophant such as yourself. However, REALITY tells an entirely different story. There is ZERO historical evidence which supports your ERRONEOUS contention.
Mucho Mensa

Temple Hills, MD

#433 May 26, 2013
See the light wrote:
Every Liberal should be shot,and killed.!
Quite frightening that some of the conservatives on this site haven't rebuked you for this, Hitler Jr.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#434 May 26, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite frightening that some of the conservatives on this site haven't rebuked you for this, Hitler Jr.
True conservatives would never rebuke someone telling the truth.
Mucho Mensa

Mechanicsville, VA

#435 May 26, 2013
You're not a conservative nor what I would call a true American. You are a fascist with genocidal desires. You do not want a country that allows a diversity of opinions. In fact, your mindset is kindred to that of a Taliban leader.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#436 May 26, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
You're not a conservative nor what I would call a true American. You are a fascist with genocidal desires. You do not want a country that allows a diversity of opinions. In fact, your mindset is kindred to that of a Taliban leader.
Take a hike, communist-socialist.
Mucho Mensa

Temple Hills, MD

#437 May 26, 2013
Communist? I'm far from it......I lean considerably right on most economic issues and I am a moderate with a slight lean left on social issues. But you.......you are an out and out fascist.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#438 May 26, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
Communist? I'm far from it......I lean considerably right on most economic issues and I am a moderate with a slight lean left on social issues. But you.......you are an out and out fascist.
REALLY? For INSISTING on a right SECURED in We The People's Constitution?

No TRAITOR, it is >you< that has "issues" - TREASONOUS ones.

“I just hate stupid people”

Since: Apr 07

DEEP SOUTHERN ILLINOIS

#439 May 26, 2013
The right needs to start acting like the left when pushing our agenda.
Here is what I mean.
The left thinks more collectively, more tribally which gives them a few advantages, they may not always win but they inflict damage, we must start to think and practice how they do.
Here is a few examples for you to consider.
The left is racist against whites, it is no secret, they practice daily through the media, entertainment, social policy such as affirmative action and quotas and use it to their advantage.
They hide the massive amount of hate crimes against white but bombard you night and day with the RARE white on black crime.
The left has successfully sued white organizations such as the Ku Klux klan, Ayran Nations and the White Patriot Militia because of some violent actions or crimes their members engaged in and in many cases the organizations had nothing to do with, guilt by association.
We have been rather weak in this area and that must change.
The NAACP is the largest pro black organization in the United States parading as a "civil rights" group now considering 25% of black males are either already serving a prison sentence for a crime or many crimes many of which are directed at whites it is very plausible that at least some of these criminals were active members of the NAACP.
The Black Panthers have on more than one occasion publicly have called for the murder of whites and white babies, the first thing we have to do is find out if a thug who has been arrested for a violent crime against a white has been a member of this violent group and if they have, then sue them.
The same can be applied to La Raza.
If an American is murdered by an illegal alien then that victims family should file suit against any group that advocates for illegals, and politicians that supports illegals and and that illegals home nation including our own government for not doing it's job.
Mexico has successfully sued Americans who either killed illegals or detained them, we can and should do the same.
Another lefty group who likes to sue is the LGBT, when say as an example such as the Boy Scout issue, you know some pervert gay activist will at some point molest a Scout, slam the lGBT with a lawsuit.
Nobody wins all the time, but it cost money to defend yourself, it tarnishes your image and drives some away from certain organizations, this is how they damage people, we should do the same.
I mentioned these ideas to a whites rights organization a few days ago and they said they are going to discuss these possibilities with their attorneys.
It's time to take the gloves off, get in the trenches and play dirty ball as the left does.
Mucho Mensa

Temple Hills, MD

#440 May 26, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
REALLY? For INSISTING on a right SECURED in We The People's Constitution?
No TRAITOR, it is >you< that has "issues" - TREASONOUS ones.
No, your admission that you agree "liberals should be shot" is ample evidence.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#441 May 26, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
<quoted text>
No, your admission that you agree "liberals should be shot" is ample evidence.
Is not the punishment for treason DEATH?
Mucho Mensa

Washington, DC

#442 May 27, 2013
Your definition of treason would be found in a fascist dictionary. The same forefathers you quote so often very narrowly defined treason......they did so because they knew people with perverted ideals such as yours would attempt to levy the charge of treason against anyone with a differing opinion.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#443 May 27, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
Your definition of treason would be found in a fascist dictionary. The same forefathers you quote so often very narrowly defined treason......they did so because they knew people with perverted ideals such as yours would attempt to levy the charge of treason against anyone with a differing opinion.
Journals of the Continental Congress,
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1775

A letter from General Washington, No. 11, was read.1

[Note 1: 1 This letter is in Papers of the Continental Congress, No. 152, I, folio 255, and is printed in Writings of George Washington,(Ford) III, 190.]

The secretary having digested in order the resolutions of Congress, as far as they have gone on the report of the Committee of Conference, produced the same, which being read, and agreed to as follows:

Resolved, That the following additions and alterations or amendments, be made in the RULES and REGULATIONS of the continental Army, viz.

1. All persons convicted of holding a treacherous correspondence with, or giving intelligence to the enemy, shall suffer death, or such other punishment as a general court-martial shall think proper.

2. All commissioned Officers found guilty by a general court-martial of any fraud or embezzlement, shall forfeit all his pay, be ipso facto cashiered, and deemed unfit for further service as an officer.

3. All non-commissioned Officers and soldiers, convicted before a regimental court-martial of stealing, embezzling or destroying ammunition, provisions, tools or any thing belonging to the public stores, if a non-commissioned officer, to be reduced to the ranks, and punished with whipping, not less than fifteen, nor more than thirty-nine lashes, at the discretion of the court-martial; if a private soldier with the same corporal punishment.

4. In all cases where a commissioned officer is cashiered for cowardice or fraud, it be added in the punishment, that the crime, name, place of abode, and punishment of the delinquent be published in the news papers, in and about the camp, and of that colony from which the offender came, or usually resides: after which it shall be deemed scandalous in any officer to associate with him.

5. Any officer or solider, who shall begin, excite, cause, or join in any mutiny or sedition in the regiment, troop, or company to which he belongs, or in any other regiment, troop, or company of the continental forces, either by land or sea, or in any party, post, detachment or guard, on any pretence whatsoever, shall suffer death, or such other punishment, as a general court-martial shall direct.

6. Any officer or soldier, who shall desert to the enemy, and afterwards be taken, shall suffer death, or such other punishment, as a general court-martial shall direct....

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#444 May 27, 2013
Mucho Mensa wrote:
Your definition of treason would be found in a fascist dictionary. The same forefathers you quote so often very narrowly defined treason......they did so because they knew people with perverted ideals such as yours would attempt to levy the charge of treason against anyone with a differing opinion.
Our forebears used to tar & feather, run out of town on a rail, drag behind horses, burn traitors houses down, whip, and punish traitors by various other means. In addition, they confiscated the property of THOUSANDS and SHIPPED THEM BACK TO ENGLAND.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#445 May 27, 2013
417:
See the light wrote:
Every Liberal should be shot,and killed.!
spocko wrote:
The "Founding Fatheres" were almost all liberals, in fact, the conservatives at time tried to install a King for the New World.Nearly all were well educated for their time, they all had prosperous enterprises while attending to the people’s business. the conservatives lobbied against the Bill of Rights. Most of the Founding Fathers disapproved of giving ordinary citizens the right to own land or such liberties as freedom of religion, freedom from unreasonable search and torture, the right of free speech and so forth. In fact, when John Adams was president (1797-1801), he took away freedom of speech. The Bill of Rights is, in reality, the people's voice against the Founding Fathers - liberty against conformity. The authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were progressives fighting the conservatives who lobbied against it, in fact, the wingnuz of old lobbied hard to have George Washington installed as the “King of the New World.”
'LIBERAL' is a politically correct label for a socialist, nazi, or communist.'Progressive' is also a politically correct label.

The Framers of the Constitution argued over it. Read the Federalist Papers. For example: Jefferson and Madison opposed a religion tax, Patrick Henry wanted a religion tax.
spocko wrote:
... in fact, the wingnuz of old lobbied hard to have George Washington installed as the “King of the New World.”
Yep. All of them were born and raised under a monarchy. Their weakness was they failed to give us enough freedom and privacy from Govt.

But your argument fails; the Framers gave us the best Constitutional Republic.
Mucho Mensa

Washington, DC

#446 May 27, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Our forebears used to tar & feather, run out of town on a rail, drag behind horses, burn traitors houses down, whip, and punish traitors by various other means. In addition, they confiscated the property of THOUSANDS and SHIPPED THEM BACK TO ENGLAND.
Please cite post-constitutional convictions for your version of treason as support for your argument. You can't. Instead you try to muddy the water with instances of mob violence from our past.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#448 May 27, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Projecting again, eh traitor-troll?
Funny how the gay republicunt insists he has the facts but keeps tripping over the fact that most of his heroes owned slaves...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Packing pistols: Is Texas safer with more licen... (Jul '11) 7 hr Public farts 6
News Suspect in Louisiana theatre rampage had histor... Jul 28 El Chapo 56
News Local Jews upset by Holocaust references in cam... (Jun '12) Jul 27 swedenforever 123
News Louisiana Moms, Aurora Theater Shooting Survivo... Jul 25 payme 2
News Why assault rifle sales are booming Jul 24 Here Is One 242
News Legal Loophole: Concealed carry law Jul 24 CGiven 2
News Treating Firearms Like We Do Cars? Yeaha Lets D... (Feb '12) Jul 22 Ed Hamilton 24
More from around the web