Democrat Bill Mandates Licensing of All Virginia AR-15 Owners

[John Stark]

There is a smart way to stand up for your rights and a stupid way to stand up for your rights.

Organization is the only way to stand up for your rights. Unfortunately, we as a people are not organized and never will be.

The way this should go down is everyone stands up for their rights collectively. Simultaneously. Around every government building and police station. Not just in one place in Virginia as part of an unorganized mob where the government can control and herd the cattle.

Uprisings, insurrections, rebellions, revolutions, counterinsurgencies and such simply do not start "all at once," or at least that is certainly not the norm in history.

There are flash points, brush fires, staged and unstaged events, smaller clashes followed by bigger clashes. Wins and losses, ebbs and flows.

The American Revolution didn't happen when all 13 colonies stood up all at the same time as one monolithic organization. Some colonies were only half-onboard even while the fighting was strongest or at its worst point. They had infighting, didn't agree a lot of the time, and didn't always support each other. The Revolution was decades in the making, as was the founding.

This pattern recurs throughout history. Things start locally and typically don't come to a head on a national or empire wide basis until things really go south for an extended period of time.

Though we may be looked at by the communists as malcontents and anti-government, the plain fact of the matter is that we have the righteous position. The actual law and tradition and facts are on our side. It is the left in this country that is trying to overthrow our government, not restore it.

Waiting on some big spontaneous push by everyone on "our side" across the country is absurd. Its a fantasy.

 

[Robin]

Uprisings, insurrections, rebellions, revolutions, counterinsurgencies and such simply do not start "all at once," or at least that is certainly not the norm in history.

I just can't relate to any of those terms when I think of fighting for the return to a constitutional republic, our constitutional republic.
Robin

 

[96coal449]

In 1776 3% stood up.

III %ers.

 

[Acer-m14]

Do not wear camo, or bring long guns, not even in your vehicle. Expect to be pulled over by the VSP at highway off-ramps on the way into downtown Richmond for mandatory “safety checks,” where you will be asked about any firearms in your car or truck. The police will then ask to inspect them, and to see IDs from everybody with you. They will film you, and record all firearm serial numbers and identification information. You will be hassled and harassed if you refuse to cooperate. These “safety check” officers will not be in a good mood to hear lectures on the 4th Amendment. Depending on their orders, and your decisions, you may never even make it to the Capitol Square.

with 100's of cars backed up .. how many are doing the "safety check" at one off ramp .. 10 VSP vs 100+ cars backed up with with a capacity of 4 per car .. now that's 400 to 10 if they decide to get out of there cars and confront them ..

I don't think the road check will last long if they do it ..

PS.. just wear a tie dye shirt and a pussy hat .. and drive right on thru lol ..

 

[96coal449]

and drive right on thru

in a Pryus

 

[Marine Cpl]

Uprisings, insurrections, rebellions, revolutions, counterinsurgencies and such simply do not start "all at once," or at least that is certainly not the norm in history.

I just can't relate to any of those terms when I think of fighting for the return to a constitutional republic, our constitutional republic.
Robin

How did you guys do it during the 1st American Revolution?

 

[Marine Cpl]

In 1776 3% stood up.

III %ers.

And that 3% weren’t outgunned by the government and didn’t have the media going against them. We would need a lot more than 3% now.

Based on the intensive algorithms I’ve run in my brain , you’d need about 33% now to make up for those advantages the government has.

 

[Robin]

I was about 33%
Robin

 

[livingston]

VA Dems Declare State Capitol grounds A Gun-Free Zone
With less than 24 hours notice, House and Senate Democrats today overturned more than a decade of policy and voted to ban all firearms from the Capitol and office buildings. This measure includes the general public, concealed carry permit holders, and General Assembly members. Law abiding citizens with valid concealed handgun permits have always been allowed to bring their lawful firearms into these facilities.

Not only did the vote take place with little notice and no public distribution of the policy ahead of time, it was done in a meeting that was not broadcast to the public like other committee meetings. House Democrats expressly stated that the policy was adopted at the request of the Capitol Police, which appears to be categorically untrue.

Republican Leader Todd Gilbert issued the following statement: “Democrats have long made it clear they wanted to ban firearms in the Capitol and legislative office buildings. That’s not surprising. But for Democrats to intentionally misrepresent that they were introducing the policy at the request of Capitol Police is disgusting and wrong.

“Democrats hold majorities in both chambers and can pass whatever policy they wish. However, today’s action will ensure this policy takes effect without a vote from the vast majority of legislators. Democrats want to ban guns, but not enough to stand up and take responsibility for their own policy.

“Furthermore, hiding behind the honor of our Capitol Police is cowardly. Through their underhanded maneuvers Democrats have already made it clear that they’ll do whatever it takes to implement their agenda, including making major policy changes with no notice and little debate.“

VA Dems Declare State Capitol A Gun-Free Zone

bearingarms.com

NY officials taking notes ....

 

[S&W Fan]

VA Dems Declare State Capitol grounds A Gun-Free Zone
With less than 24 hours notice, House and Senate Democrats today overturned more than a decade of policy and voted to ban all firearms from the Capitol and office buildings. This measure includes the general public, concealed carry permit holders, and General Assembly members. Law abiding citizens with valid concealed handgun permits have always been allowed to bring their lawful firearms into these facilities.

Not only did the vote take place with little notice and no public distribution of the policy ahead of time, it was done in a meeting that was not broadcast to the public like other committee meetings. House Democrats expressly stated that the policy was adopted at the request of the Capitol Police, which appears to be categorically untrue.

Republican Leader Todd Gilbert issued the following statement: “Democrats have long made it clear they wanted to ban firearms in the Capitol and legislative office buildings. That’s not surprising. But for Democrats to intentionally misrepresent that they were introducing the policy at the request of Capitol Police is disgusting and wrong.

“Democrats hold majorities in both chambers and can pass whatever policy they wish. However, today’s action will ensure this policy takes effect without a vote from the vast majority of legislators. Democrats want to ban guns, but not enough to stand up and take responsibility for their own policy.

“Furthermore, hiding behind the honor of our Capitol Police is cowardly. Through their underhanded maneuvers Democrats have already made it clear that they’ll do whatever it takes to implement their agenda, including making major policy changes with no notice and little debate.“

VA Dems Declare State Capitol A Gun-Free Zone

bearingarms.com

NY officials taking notes ....

Absolute power corrupts ABSOLUTELY

 

[Robin]

Yes, it does, but in this case it is doubly so, as they were corrupt before coming to power.
Robin

 

[96coal449]

And that 3% weren’t outgunned by the government and didn’t have the media going against them. We would need a lot more than 3% now.

Based on the intensive algorithms I’ve run in my brain , you’d need about 33% now to make up for those advantages the government has.

I was about 33%
Robin

Robin is correct. I was using the term III%ers. The colonists were divided by thirds.

One third fought the red coats, one third fought with the red coats, and the last third just went along for the ride.

 

[John Stark]

And that 3% weren’t outgunned by the government and didn’t have the media going against them. We would need a lot more than 3% now.

This is also factually incorrect. The colonists were certainly outgunned by the British empire, which was the equivalent of a super power in its day, as demonstrated by its ability to project its military capability around the world due to its naval might and its well disciplined soldiers (both naval and land based personnel).

The colonial military was quite inferior to the British empire in terms of raw military man power, and had no real capability at sea at the start of hostilities. This is why the colonial government sought to ally with the once-hated French and gladly accepted their help and the cooperative military expertise and leadership of Lafayette. The irony of the situation among those in colonial and military leadership certainly was not lost on them, given how many of them fought against the French in the French and Indian war.

Without French military aid, particularly in the form of supplies, money, and naval support, there is the real possibility that we would still be subjects of the British crown. This demonstrates the diplomatic genius of American figures like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and many other Founders, who gained through diplomacy and intrigue what could not be gotten through "politics by other means."

Furthermore, the colonists certainly did have a hostile press. There was no First Amendment and the crown had the undisputed power to arrest and imprison those that spoke against it, particularly in colonial holdings where, though they were technically British subjects, their Rights under British law were typically trampled upon and ignored by the crown. The pre-revolutionary cry of "no taxation without representation" is a clear demonstration of how hostile the press was in their day. As British subjects they had the right to have representatives to speak for them, but were denied that basic British right that was well established.

As well, the British crown could close down newspapers, inhibit the writings of pamphleteers and the distribution of their ideas, and even levied taxes on paper through the Stamp Act and other things to hamper the colonial press.

Add in the fact that the British crown could and regularly did make public proclamations and declarations, and did restrict the same exercise by it's own subjects (particularly colonial citizens who were often thought of as "second class"), and its obvious that there was a very hostile media in their day.

For the most part, we are not yet subject to arrest for speaking our minds in the United States, although they are working on that. The colonial government was subject to arrest and imprisonment just for speaking or writing.

Also a key factor to consider in terms of the press then versus now; in our day we are essentially arguing over what it means to be American, whereas the argument for the colonials who fought was, "Its meaningless to pretend to be British any longer, so let's do something new." To break with the British crown was to become traitors with very harsh consequences. Today everyone can mouth off to and even against our government with very few consequences (again, they are working on that, which is why they want our arms).

The colonial leaders and warfighters won through an ingenious combination of military, social, diplomatic, economic, and religious strategies and tactics, which are very well documented, not through raw power. They were practically speaking outgunned by an empire that was trying to put a gag over their mouth and chains on their limbs, or shovel dirt over their graves, if they dared to continue to challenge British military, legal, social, and religious might.

It should not be lost on modern Americans that the Founders themselves considered their success in attempting to form a "more perfect union" an act of Divine Providence and a miraculous blessing of Almighty God, and not merely an expected result of their own power and smarts and resources. This too is well documented, and there are lengthy writings, speeches, and quotes from all of them to this effect.

 

[Robin]

"For the most part, we are not yet subject to arrest for speaking our minds in the United States, although they are working on that. The colonial government was subject to arrest and imprisonment just for speaking or writing."

Yes, they are, Red Flag laws, hate crime enhancer's are just a couple, there are more.
If you think this is just a fight for your guns, your'e in a state of denial.
Robin

 

[holdover]

The colonists had few if any cannons at the start too.

 

[spat]

The colonists had few if any cannons at the start too.

And the whole shebang kicked off when the duly appointed government sent some duly appointed LE agents to confiscate a couple of them after they passed some new gun control.

It is eerily similar to today.

 

[John Stark]

Yes, they are, Red Flag laws, hate crime enhancer's are just a couple, there are more.
If you think this is just a fight for your guns, your'e in a state of denial.
Robin

We are in complete agreement on both Red Flags and hate crimes garbage, which is why I said more than once that "they are working on that."

However, there are still strong legal remedies available to us against almost all restrictions upon speech in this country.

Red Flag laws attack Due Process more than speech, per se, an egregious attack on our rights within the legal framework of so-called justice than speech. You can get Red Flagged without saying anything.

Hate crimes charges are typically add on charges to alleged other crimes, but absolutely often revolve around the prior speech of the person arrested for a another crime that likely doesn't.

One you didn't mention is the defacto social credit system being built here by big tech who are in flagrant violation of the law when it comes to the status of their communication technology as "platforms" rather than as "publishers." Oddly enough most of these (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, the alphabet news corps along with entertainment media like Netflix, Disney and the rest of of Hollywood) are deeply in bed with our governmental masters, engaging in an incestuous relationship to control speech that ignores the law on this matter because it is to their mutual benefit.

Still, as egregious as it is, as American citizens we still do have strong legal remedies available to us. In the colonial era, they had far, far fewer both practically and theoretically.

 

[ExMember_4526]

This is also factually incorrect. The colonists were certainly outgunned by the British empire, which was the equivalent of a super power in its day, as demonstrated by its ability to project its military capability around the world due to its naval might and its well disciplined soldiers (both naval and land based personnel).

The colonial military was quite inferior to the British empire in terms of raw military man power, and had no real capability at sea at the start of hostilities. This is why the colonial government sought to ally with the once-hated French and gladly accepted their help and the cooperative military expertise and leadership of Lafayette. The irony of the situation among those in colonial and military leadership certainly was not lost on them, given how many of them fought against the French in the French and Indian war.

Without French military aid, particularly in the form of supplies, money, and naval support, there is the real possibility that we would still be subjects of the British crown. This demonstrates the diplomatic genius of American figures like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and many other Founders, who gained through diplomacy and intrigue what could not be gotten through "politics by other means."

Furthermore, the colonists certainly did have a hostile press. There was no First Amendment and the crown had the undisputed power to arrest and imprison those that spoke against it, particularly in colonial holdings where, though they were technically British subjects, their Rights under British law were typically trampled upon and ignored by the crown. The pre-revolutionary cry of "no taxation without representation" is a clear demonstration of how hostile the press was in their day. As British subjects they had the right to have representatives to speak for them, but were denied that basic British right that was well established.

As well, the British crown could close down newspapers, inhibit the writings of pamphleteers and the distribution of their ideas, and even levied taxes on paper through the Stamp Act and other things to hamper the colonial press.

Add in the fact that the British crown could and regularly did make public proclamations and declarations, and did restrict the same exercise by it's own subjects (particularly colonial citizens who were often thought of as "second class"), and its obvious that there was a very hostile media in their day.

For the most part, we are not yet subject to arrest for speaking our minds in the United States, although they are working on that. The colonial government was subject to arrest and imprisonment just for speaking or writing.

Also a key factor to consider in terms of the press then versus now; in our day we are essentially arguing over what it means to be American, whereas the argument for the colonials who fought was, "Its meaningless to pretend to be British any longer, so let's do something new." To break with the British crown was to become traitors with very harsh consequences. Today everyone can mouth off to and even against our government with very few consequences (again, they are working on that, which is why they want our arms).

The colonial leaders and warfighters won through an ingenious combination of military, social, diplomatic, economic, and religious strategies and tactics, which are very well documented, not through raw power. They were practically speaking outgunned by an empire that was trying to put a gag over their mouth and chains on their limbs, or shovel dirt over their graves, if they dared to continue to challenge British military, legal, social, and religious might.

It should not be lost on modern Americans that the Founders themselves considered their success in attempting to form a "more perfect union" an act of Divine Providence and a miraculous blessing of Almighty God, and not merely an expected result of their own power and smarts and resources. This too is well documented, and there are lengthy writings, speeches, and quotes from all of them to this effect.

Ha, you sir actually understand this topic & have actually read documented, well vetted sources of information. I’m kind of pleasantly shocked dude!

Being that you have a certain level of understanding, what do you think we in NYS could practically do to advance “Gun Rights” at this stage?

Ha, I’m still pleasantly surprised you exist on this forum! This guy won the internet today! My level of cynicism regarding “Gun Rights” activism actually went down five notches!

Someone buy this dude a coffee, or a beer, or some boxes of ammo, or all of the above! This guy actually gets it! Holy crap!

 

[ExMember_4526]

We are in complete agreement on both Red Flags and hate crimes garbage, which is why I said more than once that "they are working on that."

However, there are still strong legal remedies available to us against almost all restrictions upon speech in this country.

Red Flag laws attack Due Process more than speech, per se, an egregious attack on our rights within the legal framework of so-called justice than speech. You can get Red Flagged without saying anything.

Hate crimes charges are typically add on charges to alleged other crimes, but absolutely often revolve around the prior speech of the person arrested for a another crime that likely doesn't.

One you didn't mention is the defacto social credit system being built here by big tech who are in flagrant violation of the law when it comes to the status of their communication technology as "platforms" rather than as "publishers." Oddly enough most of these (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, the alphabet news corps along with entertainment media like Netflix, Disney and the rest of of Hollywood) are deeply in bed with our governmental masters, engaging in an incestuous relationship to control that ignores the law on this matter because it is to their mutual benefit.

Still, as egregious as it is, as American citizens we still do have strong legal remedies available to us. In the colonial era, they had far, far fewer both practically and theoretically.

Yes!!!!!!!!!!

 

[E the massive]

Im so glad you said it. And thats why I do not give a single fuck. Nary a one.

Itll never happen here
Move to another state

Lemme know how that works out.

They are only as free as their masters see fit. Just like NY. I mentioned that on a prepper forum when the safe act first appeared. The free staters, most of the forum, flipped their shit. Im usually not a "I told you so", but....

 

[holdover]

Its a giant fucking Killzone.

 

[E the massive]

Box canyon.

 

[holdover]

I don't like this set up . All its going to take is a several provocateur's a few blocks away in different positions, to begin firing into the air or the dirt or creek. For the people in the area its going to sound like shit has kicked off nearby and they need to get out or draw their weapon , they wont know what the hell is going on . Police may be able to engage at that point. Confusion, gun shots, recipe for disaster .

 

[John Stark]

Perfect example of the perfidious behavior of our "free" press:

YouTube blocks links to texts of Virginia anti-gun Bills

YouTube is now blocking links to the State of Virginia Legislative Information System (LIS). On Saturday, the YouTube channel Guns & Gadgets posted a video titled “Virginia Anti-Gun Bills To Be Heard Jan 13,” wherein the proprie...

www.americanthinker.com

Google owned YouTube blocking Virginians from videos... coming out of their own "Legislative Information System" that is intended for general consumption so... VA citizens can watch the legislative process.

 

[ExMember_4526]

Perfect example of the perfidious behavior of our "free" press:

YouTube blocks links to texts of Virginia anti-gun Bills

YouTube is now blocking links to the State of Virginia Legislative Information System (LIS). On Saturday, the YouTube channel Guns & Gadgets posted a video titled “Virginia Anti-Gun Bills To Be Heard Jan 13,” wherein the proprie...

www.americanthinker.com

Google owned YouTube blocking Virginians from videos... coming out of their own "Legislative Information System" that is intended for general consumption so... VA citizens can watch the legislative process.

Google (i.e. Alphabet)!

Ha, dude you are so well informed!

People should become educated about information security and the data collection policies of the state and the extent to which private companies cooperate with the state. This isn’t just about “Gun Rights“.

The novel 1984 was a joke compared to the conditions on the ground as it relates to information security/privacy rights.

It suffices to say that our “80% Lowers” don’t achieve what one might think!

 

[GOPerfect]

Labeled? You are just gonna say fuck it and label them felons? Who the fuck do these people think they are?

How about a fuck right off, die and wishes for your families to suffer horrible pains?

 

[Uzi]

I don't like this set up . All its going to take is a several provocateur's a few blocks away in different positions, to begin firing into the air or the dirt or creek. For the people in the area its going to sound like shit has kicked off nearby and they need to get out or draw their weapon , they wont know what the hell is going on . Police may be able to engage at that point. Confusion, gun shots, recipe for disaster .

If that's the reaction as apposed to having at least a few exit strategies in place for leaving the area to avoid an issue, especially when you have no idea what's going on, all involved reacting in such a manner would be morons. In fact, if half of these people that are going here dressed up to play civil war because they actually WANT to engage protesters, police, etc, Then I say let them get their fix of some itchy trigger finger that'll land them in jail or worse for ignoring the possible complications.

Don't tell me that anyone going there thinks the rally is going to change the minds of the tyrannic elites and puppets doing their job. People are going there because they want to engage and stir shit up, wear some tactical gear, feel cool, because it's exciting and they can then say that they've even stood up and did something meaningful. This is a fun event in the eyes of keyboard warriors and bored ex serviceman.

If someone like a commie faggot shot off some m-80's or a pistol in an alley way without ever showing their face, and everyone freaked out because of it, or a pissed off tranny threw a can of pepsi into a crowd to set everyone off, they've just out smarted 10,000's of pro gun protesters when they've had weeks and weeks and weeks of knowing it was a possibility that they'd try anything to spark a reaction.

 

[ExMember_4526]

It should not be lost on modern Americans that the Founders themselves considered their success in attempting to form a "more perfect union" an act of Divine Providence and a miraculous blessing of Almighty God, and not merely an expected result of their own power and smarts and resources. This too is well documented, and there are lengthy writings, speeches, and quotes from all of them to this effect.

Well, that’s an inconvenient fact for some!

This guy gets it so hard, holy crap!

Dude, you’re on fire! Keep going!

 

[Jmac00]

If you're worried about road blocks, show up two days early, that way you can beat the crowds and the cops.

 

[GOPerfect]

Ha, you sir actually understand this topic & have actually read documented, well vetted sources of information. I’m kind of pleasantly shocked dude!

Being that you have a certain level of understanding, what do you think we in NYS could practically do to advance “Gun Rights” at this stage?

Ha, I’m still pleasantly surprised you exist on this forum! This guy won the internet today! My level of cynicism regarding “Gun Rights” activism actually went down five notches!

Someone buy this dude a coffee, or a beer, or some boxes of ammo, or all of the above! This guy actually gets it! Holy crap!

If you stick around long enough, you will find that there are many on this forum that are quite educated and very well spoken.

John Stark is one of many intelligent people here. You should understand that many of these topics have been discussed over and over here. You have gone through and participated in a couple of threads only, wait, you will see.

We have novice experts here on many subjects and topics. Members from all walks of life. I am pleasantly surprised how much I have learned from other members.