Survivalist Forum banner

1 - 20 of 107 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Most of us no doubt know that there is a world of difference between those who obtain guns legally and use them for lawful purposes and those who use guns to commit crime. I take it must of us if not all of us on this forum are of the former category, at least that's what I hope. Gun rights groups like to emphasize the importance of obeying the law, and I agree with them, for the most part.

If you as me we should be law abiding as long as the laws we abide by don't violate the Constitution and don't violate the Bill Of Rights, that's where we should draw the line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
So is your idea that if you, personally, think a law violates the Constitution, you should not obey it? That is problematic because it is not up to the individual whether or not a law violates the Constitution. It is supposedly up to our legislatures to only pass laws that are constitutional, our executive branches to only enforce laws that are constitutional and the courts to keep them honest. But of course that isn't working because the electorate, of which we are all a part if we are over 18, has elected politicians who are not devoted to following that principle.

As a result, if we as individuals make the choice to disobey laws that are unconstitutional, we are no longer "law abiding" and we can wind up in prison. The solution is to only elect politicians who fully support the Constitution and then hold them accountable. But we haven't been doing that. There is no simple answer, no answer without serious consequences.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,333 Posts
Most of us no doubt know that there is a world of difference between those who obtain guns legally and use them for lawful purposes and those who use guns to commit crime. I take it must of us if not all of us on this forum are of the former category, at least that's what I hope. Gun rights groups like to emphasize the importance of obeying the law, and I agree with them, for the most part.

If you as me we should be law abiding as long as the laws we abide by don't violate the Constitution and don't violate the Bill Of Rights, that's where we should draw the line.
Legal gun owners hardly use them for crime. But news flash most illegal gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns either. Violent crime is really carried out mostly by a very small percentage of the population. Even most illegal gun owners are just non violent felons carrying for self protection or even people who could not get a permit or make a legal purchase but are not criminals. ( underage, medical pot users , illegal aliens , live in very blue areas , etc ).

i think it is important to remember are criminal justice system is immorally and arbitrarily applied in many ways and the average american commits multiple felonies and does not even know it.

We often like to think there are law abiding good guys and law breaking bad guys. But really it is a little more complicated than that. Certainly most law breakers are not violent even if they are not “ good guys” in the traditional sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Most of us no doubt know that there is a world of difference between those who obtain guns legally and use them for lawful purposes and those who use guns to commit crime. I take it must of us if not all of us on this forum are of the former category, at least that's what I hope. Gun rights groups like to emphasize the importance of obeying the law, and I agree with them, for the most part.

If you as me we should be law abiding as long as the laws we abide by don't violate the Constitution and don't violate the Bill Of Rights, that's where we should draw the line.
Simple, imo:

When a law is made against you and it is unfair, disobey it. You didn't murder anyone. You shouldn't pay any penalties for such crimes. Confiscation is a worse version of a traffic ticket in that you are fined. Your money and your time are taken. That is a legal penalty.

Just refuse to cooperate. They can't get all of you. They can't even get one percent of 100 million firearm owners.

One way they can increase their efficiency is by using social media to doxx you. Here's another simple solution: Shut it off. Having Facebook is not compulsory and even if it did become compulsory, just make a fake one with pretty pictures on it and then never use it.

Also understand that you 100 million are important. Without you, America cannot eat or clothe itself. You have leverage. Use it.

Just say no.
 

·
Padre in the woods
Joined
·
1,803 Posts
So, I'm old. I've seen things, and bore witness to things. At at times participated in things. However, in all my life, and from age 6 to present, I can never say that I've used a gun or knife illegally, or in the commission of hurting someone or something. Nobody I know has done anything criminal in their life. I'm repulsed by being called a criminal by people who in their party support criminals.

That said, I'm tired of my friends and I being blamed as being blamed for problems, and portrayed as some kind of gunned-up Viking marauders poised to kill everything we encounter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
Legal gun owners hardly use them for crime. But news flash most illegal gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns either. Violent crime is really carried out mostly by a very small percentage of the population. Even most illegal gun owners are just non violent felons carrying for self protection or even people who could not get a permit or make a legal purchase but are not criminals. ( underage, medical pot users , illegal aliens , live in very blue areas , etc ).

i think it is important to remember are criminal justice system is immorally and arbitrarily applied in many ways and the average american commits multiple felonies and does not even know it.

We often like to think there are law abiding good guys and law breaking bad guys. But really it is a little more complicated than that. Certainly most law breakers are not violent even if they are not “ good guys” in the traditional sense.
I would never agree with you but in this case you make a more than valid point. I am not sure how many statutory laws there are on the books but it is like over ten thousand. No one can know all of them. Silly stuff like having the wrong flower or turtle shell can land a person in hot water with a felony charge.

There is a valid argument that once a person has repaid their debt to society then that persons should have all their rights restored. Where do rights come from?

If I interpret the law to mean one thing and you interpret it another are we both correct?
No and yes. I have heard about cases in some states where some judges rule in one manner whereas other judges in the same state rule in a different manner. This was explained to me by a trader of goods in the north midwest part of the country.

The law should be written in a manner in which it is so clearly written that no one could interpret it any way but the one way it was intended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
So, I'm old. I've seen things, and bore witness to things. At at times participated in things. However, in all my life, and from age 6 to present, I can never say that I've used a gun or knife illegally, or in the commission of hurting someone or something. Nobody I know has done anything criminal in their life. I'm repulsed by being called a criminal by people who in their party support criminals.

That said, I'm tired of my friends and I being blamed as being blamed for problems, and portrayed as some kind of gunned-up Viking marauders poised to kill everything we encounter.
I presume you are white. In the eyes of the American Left, that is your true sin. If you are a straight, white Christian male and support 2nd Amendment.... you are irredeemably evil and marked for correction. They are determined to take down Western Civilization and all its traditions. If you don't believe this, spend one hour watching CNN. Even the commercials are dominated by themes of Wokefulness and celebration of abnormal relationships. Big Media relishes every opportunity to fan the flames of racial animosity. Fundamental transformation of America, indeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,892 Posts
Slavery was legal at one point; not all laws are good or Constitutional. I think most people forget that the Constitution isn't our "bill" of permission, it's the restriction on the government. When ignorant or tyrannical legislatures pass un-Constitutional laws that are illegally enforced by the Executive Branch, and not defended by the Judicial Branch...is it really unlawful to not comply? I don't and wouldn't advocate doing anything "illegal", but there is a point where even certain laws will make every law-abiding citizen a law-breaker...even if those laws are un-Constitutional.

There is the reality that when our government representatives (whether we voted for them or not) pass laws we deem unconstitutional and the courts do not defend our God-given rights and the executive branch selectively enforces their own interpretation or targets the non-criminal citizens...any decision to not-comply comes with consequences. Common sense is a large part of this and "law-abiding" citizen who can legally own firearm has solemn duty to exercise their personal liberties the greatest level of risk they're comfortable with. The best way to not-comply with laws you deem un-Constitutional, is to get more active locally, invest a little on pro-Constitutional candidates, and voice your concerns to those who are in elected positions.

ROCK6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
So is your idea that if you, personally, think a law violates the Constitution, you should not obey it? That is problematic because it is not up to the individual whether or not a law violates the Constitution. It is supposedly up to our legislatures to only pass laws that are constitutional, our executive branches to only enforce laws that are constitutional and the courts to keep them honest. But of course that isn't working because the electorate, of which we are all a part if we are over 18, has elected politicians who are not devoted to following that principle.
You do know the underlying purpose of the 2A? The 2A is not for hunting, target shooting, or self defense, rather the underlying purpose of the 2A is to serve as a final check and balance on government. If all else fails the 2A gives the people the means to revolt against the government should the government become tyrannical. Obviously revolting against the government, whether its tyrannical or not, is illegal but that's the overall purpose of the 2A, to give the people a means to revolt in such a situation.

As a result, if we as individuals make the choice to disobey laws that are unconstitutional, we are no longer "law abiding" and we can wind up in prison. The solution is to only elect politicians who fully support the Constitution and then hold them accountable. But we haven't been doing that. There is no simple answer, no answer without serious consequences.
I wholeheartedly agree that we should vote for politicians who respect and abide by the constitution and do what we can to see that they get elected, but if that fails, then what?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Legal gun owners hardly use them for crime. But news flash most illegal gun owners do not commit crimes with their guns either. Violent crime is really carried out mostly by a very small percentage of the population. Even most illegal gun owners are just non violent felons carrying for self protection or even people who could not get a permit or make a legal purchase but are not criminals. ( underage, medical pot users , illegal aliens , live in very blue areas , etc ).

i think it is important to remember are criminal justice system is immorally and arbitrarily applied in many ways and the average american commits multiple felonies and does not even know it.

We often like to think there are law abiding good guys and law breaking bad guys. But really it is a little more complicated than that. Certainly most law breakers are not violent even if they are not “ good guys” in the traditional sense.
You're absolutely right that it is more complicated than "law abiding = good guys, law breaking = bad guys." I would say its much more complicated. George Washington and his army were all "bad guys" according to the British since they were obviously not abiding by British law when they revolted. What law abiding means is that you comply with the government, but what if the government is the bad guys? The government can sometimes be the bad guys as our forefathers knew too well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I would never agree with you but in this case you make a more than valid point. I am not sure how many statutory laws there are on the books but it is like over ten thousand. No one can know all of them. Silly stuff like having the wrong flower or turtle shell can land a person in hot water with a felony charge.
What kind of flower or turtle shell can result in a person being slapped with a felony? Sounds absurd.

There is a valid argument that once a person has repaid their debt to society then that persons should have all their rights restored. Where do rights come from?
I agree, if a person isn't ready to have their rights restored then they're not ready to be let out of prison. Im all for having all rights restored once getting out of prison, Im also all for longer prison sentences when they're needed.

The law should be written in a manner in which it is so clearly written that no one could interpret it any way but the one way it was intended.
But sometimes its not all that cut and dry, for instance the fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, but what exactly is an "unreasonable" search and seizure? The eighth amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but when is a punishment "cruel and unusual?"

But I will say this much, the 2A is very cut and dry when it says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, I see no other way to interpret it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
It was accurate years ago. I'll look now.

42% of households or 393 million legal firearms. It's higher. Obama and Biden have been such good firearms salesmen.
I would say the best salesman for firearms has been Covid-19, gun and ammo sales skyrocketed when the pandemic started last year and supply has still not caught up with demand.

But even with the gun sales spike from Covid-19 I still don't think the number is at 100 million plus, I thought it was more around 80 million.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
But I will say this much, the 2A is very cut and dry when it says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, I see no other way to interpret it.
Exactly my point! It is clearly written.

But sometimes its not all that cut and dry, for instance the fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, but what exactly is an "unreasonable" search and seizure? The eighth amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but when is a punishment "cruel and unusual?"
Who wrote the U.S. Constitution and more importantly, who was it written for?

I agree, if a person isn't ready to have their rights restored then they're not ready to be let out of prison. Im all for having all rights restored once getting out of prison, Im also all for longer prison sentences when they're needed.
Everyone in prison will swear up and down to God that they are ready. Just ask them. My point is who is the giver of rights to free men? Who is able to take away those rights and for how long? Here is a hint, it is not the government who gives rights. The government is only able to give privileges.

What kind of flower or turtle shell can result in a person being slapped with a felony? Sounds absurd.
Look it up, you might be guilty of breaking the law and not even know it! Maybe not a felony though, looks like a lot of misdemeanors and a few first-degree misdemeanor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
I would say the best salesman for firearms has been Covid-19, gun and ammo sales skyrocketed when the pandemic started last year and supply has still not caught up with demand.

But even with the gun sales spike from Covid-19 I still don't think the number is at 100 million plus, I thought it was more around 80 million.
Lets make an educated guess, since actual number of gun owners aren't known. With the US population at 330 million and figuring 200 million are adults.... what percentage of adults own guns? At 50% gun ownership, the number would be roughly 100 million. In this example, I am assuming 2/3rds of the population are age 18 or older. In rural states like my own Kentucky, the percentage of gun ownership would be higher I suspect.
 
Joined
·
15,333 Posts
There are a number of ways, and combinations of the same, to fight perceived unconstitutional laws/interpretations.
  • Electing those leaders that agree with your beliefs.
  • There is peaceful and both passive/active, civil disobedience, championed by the likes of MLK.
  • There is violent, both civil and criminal disobedience, most recently brought to you by BLM and AntiFa.
  • There are those that choose to comply technically with said laws, but only as it is worded. I've walked this line on more than an occasion.
  • There is the filing of civil actions through the judicial branch.
  • There is the lobbying of the legislative branch, that create laws.
  • There is the lobbying of the executive branch, that enforces laws, as well as the creation and enforcement of code, EOs, EAs, etc.
  • There are those that largely withdraw from the general population altogether, though its effectiveness is both limited and debatable. Sovereign citizens, tax protesters, and the few cult religions rarely succeed in accomplishing their overall goals for an extended period of time, but there are exceptions to such.
  • Lastly, there are those individuals that just don't care and outright violate said laws. So long as they don't call attention to themselves, such people generally aren't bothered, but there are again, exceptions.
How anyone wishes to individually proceed, is up to them.
 
1 - 20 of 107 Posts
Top