Guest Post: Feinstein's Gun Control Bill Will Trigger The Next American Revolution

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,

All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party - Mao Tse Tung

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military - William Burroughs

Revolution?  Yes, it all sounds rather “extreme”, but the cold hard reality of our era is not going to comfort us with diplomacies and niceties, so honestly, why should I have to sugar coat anything?  We live in extreme times and there is no longer room for prancing around the ultimate consequences of that which is taking place in America today.  This country is increasingly sliding towards the edge of internal conflict.  The Liberty Movement and true Constitutionalists see it, subsections of Republicans and Democrats see it, and most of all, the federal government sees it.  In fact, they may even be counting on it. 

Over the past two years alone, multiple draconian policies have been enacted through executive order by the Obama Administration which build upon the civil liberty crushing actions of George W. Bush and press far beyond.  The Patriot Acts, the FISA domestic spy bill, the bailouts of corrupt international banks, attempts at CISPA and SOPA, actions like the NDAA authorizing the treatment of U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants” without rights to due process; all paint a picture so clear only a one-celled amoeba (or your average suburban yuppie) would not see it.  You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have been designated potential targets of the state.  Our rights have been made forfeit.

There is no ambiguous or muddled separation between the citizenry and the government anymore.  The separation is absolute.  It is undeniable.  It is vast.  It is only a matter of time and momentum, and eventually there will be unbridled oppression, dissent, and conflict.  All that is required is a trigger, and I believe that trigger has arrived…       

Though made to appear “complex”, the gun control debate is actually an incredibly simple issue.  It all boils down to a couple of questions which gun grabbers rarely ask:  How does the 2nd Amendment affect the future?  That is to say, what was the original intent, and should we still value that intent as it applies to tomorrow?  And, what will really happen if it is forcibly removed?  Gun opponents act as though they are unaware of these questions, or maybe they don’t care.  However, it is vital to their safety and the safety of our culture in general that they do finally consider the bigger picture. 

We’ve all heard the prefabricated gun control talking points before.  Some of them so old they predate us.  They are numerous and most of them incredibly thin.  The gist of the anti-gun position, though, could be boiled down to these three points...

Common Anti-Gun Arguments:

1) The 2nd Amendment is “outdated” and no longer relevant in today’s modern society.

2) We do not want to stop you from “defending yourself”, or interfere with the American tradition of hunting, but people do not need “military assault weapons” for either.

3) Your claimed freedom to own guns should not supersede my freedom to live without fear of guns.  We exist in a society, and our society requires us to give up certain freedoms so that it can function.

Again, in response to these arguments, I have to ask, what does the 2nd Amendment mean for the future?  What was its original intent?  Gun control advocates would like to ignore the fact that the Constitution specifically protects a broad application of gun ownership, but when they cannot deny the legality of it, they instead turn to more abstract and existential methods of attack.  They try to twist the original intent of the 2nd Amendment to further their goals.  To respond briefly to each of the above fallacies:   

1) The right to self defense from ANY threat, whether it be an individual, or a criminal government, does not “outdate”.  It is a universal and eternal freedom.  It is a foundational pillar of natural law.  Even if the 2nd Amendment did not exist, I would still have the inborn right to arm and protect myself and those I love, and the best way to do that is to own firearms.  The men who drafted the Constitution were far more intelligent than any pithy gun grabber today, yet, these socialist errand boys seem to believe that they have “surpassed” the wisdom of the Founders.  The amount of ego required to fuel such an attitude boggles the mind…

Gun violence and violence in general will not end simply by banning firearms.  The very idea that any society can remove all weapons from their sight is naïve to begin with.  Criminals always find a way.  Murder, rape, and mayhem will continue until you confront the root problem, which is the human mind, and the human heart.  Only when these two things are balanced in all people will violence end.  Disarming good men and women has never made a society “safer”.  When the power of defense is removed from the people, someone, somewhere, will seek to abuse their weakness.  The most armed entity of the time invariably becomes the subjugator, and usually this is the government.  Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, etc, all contained disarmed populations.  The guns were gone, and still millions upon millions died.  Modern day Mexico is a perfect example of a disarmed population that is now living in terror because of criminal organizations (which, of course, still have guns).  Disarmament does NOT end gun violence, it only changes the dynamic of who uses that violence, and it makes innocent victims easier to attack.

2) Because the legal argument over the “interpretation” of the 2nd Amendment is essentially over, and the Supreme Court has ruled that gun rights do indeed apply to individuals, and not just collective bodies like the National Guard, gun grabbers are now reverting to the argument that we ARE allowed to defend ourselves with firearms, but the kinds of firearms we are able to use can still be limited.  The goal of this argument is to fool gun owners who only possess conventional firearms (hunting rifles) into believing that they will not be personally affected if they support a ban on military style weapons.  These wishy-washy hunting enthusiasts are often referred to as “Elmer Fudds” because of their gullibility.

All gun confiscation programs start by chipping away at the outer barriers of gun ownership.  Like termites slowly chewing away at the wooden skeleton of a home, anti-gun proponents start small and end by destroying the entire edifice.  Anyone who believes Feinstein’s legislation will begin and end with AR-15’s and AK-47’s is living in fantasy land.  That said, the 2nd Amendment was not established for hunting purposes.  Nowhere in the writings of the Founding Fathers do they mention “hunting” as their primary concern.  Instead, gun rights are protected in order to ensure that the citizenry remains dominant over any centralized government that turns to corruption.  We are supposed to police our own political leaders, and without military style arms, this becomes increasingly difficult. 

Gun grabbers will argue that our government is not the enemy because it is derived through democratic elections.  They will say that we can change it anytime we like in the voting box.  I would point out that regardless of which party is placed in power through elections, nothing in terms of our direction as a country has been changed, and, that both parties support almost identical policies.  For instance, Obama has come out in favor of nearly identical policy initiatives to Bush, and I can almost guarantee that many Republicans will sign onto the gun control efforts of Democrats despite their supposed pro-gun rhetoric.  When the two party system becomes a one party system, voting becomes irrelevant. 

Finally, they will admonish the idea of an armed citizenry keeping the government in check as a “fairy tale”.  They will claim that in the face of modern military might, constitutionalists would be crushed.  For what can an AK-47 do to an F-15?  Apparently, they have never heard of Afghanistan, which has used AK-47’s and 30 year old armaments to repel two technologically advanced armies; the Soviet Union and the U.S.  Of course, the Afghanis did not allow themselves to be disarmed…   

3) Here is where we get into the nonsense of intellectual idiocy.  The only real skill which academics seem to have is jumbling piles of logical fallacies together to make a single argument that sounds “rational”, but, in fact, isn’t.  The third debate point is an extremely collectivist one, and collectivist arguments generally exploit the idea that individuals must sacrifice their personal freedoms in order for the group to function. 

The truth is, the group does not matter.  The perceived collective concerns and fears of a mass of people are not relevant.  All that matters are the concerns of the singular man or woman, and whether or not those concerns are legitimate.  If a person “fears” guns and gun violence, then that is their private problem, not the problem of our entire society.  We as gun owners should not have to relinquish our rights because others are afraid of what MIGHT happen to them.  We should demand that they control THEIR fear, instead of being allowed to control OUR guns.  Just because a portion of our country shares this individual fear does not make that fear any more credible, or any more our problem.      

Do They Know What They Are In For...?

Feinstein’s campaign for gun control is not hers alone; it has been the overall establishment’s work in progress for decades.  I covered the broad based arguments of gun control advocates above because I wanted to illustrate the tangibility of gun ownership.  I want to show you where we stand as constitutionalists, and I can say confidently that our moral and intellectual footing is strong.  To be clear, when defenders of a particular idea are right in their position, they are much more likely to fight and die for that position, and they are much more likely to win.  

In the beginning I asked what the 2nd Amendment means for the future of this country.  Not only if it continues, but if it disappears.  If I was a gun control proponent, I would weigh the aftereffects of my actions carefully, because the penalties will likely be dire…

I have heard it argued that Americans are passive.  We didn’t rise up against the last Assault Weapons Ban. We didn’t rise up against the Patriot Act.  We didn’t rise up against TSA molestation.  We didn’t rise up against warrantless wiretapping, the assassination of U.S. citizens, or even the NDAA.  The people who make this point, though, are not looking at the larger issue.  It is one thing for our government to pass legislation; the wider application of that legislation on our streets and at our doorsteps is another matter. 

Feinstein’s bill is unprecedented in the history of this country, and requires widespread enforcement in every town and hamlet in order to be effective.  The way in which it is designed makes a violent response from the public inevitable.  It reaches far beyond the Assault Weapons Ban of the 1990’s, calling for the creation of a massive database of almost all gun owners in the United States.  This database will require citizens to submit their EXISTING firearms to cataloging, and the owners to be filed and fingerprinted like criminals. 

The bill will ban the outright the sale, manufacture, and transfer of at least 120 models of firearms (which have not yet been named).  It will ban the manufacture and sale of most if not all semi-automatic rifles and the bill specifically targets handguns as well.  Large capacity mags and mag fed weapons will essentially disappear from gun stores.  Though, those guns designated as “hunting rifles” will be exempt (for now).

Feinstein has also openly agreed with NY Governor Andrew Cuomo that government buy back programs (forced selling of firearms at a reduced price) and even physical confiscations are on the table:

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/new-york-governor-andrew-cuomo-says-gun-confiscation-could-be-option

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-feinstein-suggests-national-buyback-of-guns/article/2516648

To put this bluntly, there are approximately 50 million gun owners (according to official estimates) in the United States.  If only 2% of those gun owners refuse to submit to the Feinstein Database, and the feds attempt confiscation, they will have a massive revolution on their hands.

Many Americans, including myself, will not be strolling into the local Fusion Center to register our weapons.  Why?  Because gun registration reeks of fascism!  Some might call this “cliche”, but let’s just examine the guidelines of the Nazi Gun Registration Program of 1938:

- Classified guns for "sporting purposes"

- All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.

- Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law (meaning officials could have guns, citizens could not).

- Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.

- The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.

- Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.

You see, we’ve witnessed the Feinstein gun bill before, many times through history.  We know how it ends, so, there is very little incentive for us to go along quietly.

The database itself is truly the crux of it all.  It basically begs to be defied.  When a government has become openly hostile to common people, destructive of their economy, and oppressive of their individual rights, it only follows that gun registration will lead to outright confiscation later down the road or imprisonment for the owner.  Many Americans are simply not going to fall into the same trap that past societies have fallen into.  The eventual refusal of millions of citizens to voluntarily register will lead to a definite federal response. 

The Department Of Homeland Security has obviously taken this into account, at least partly, by stockpiling over 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the span of a year, most of which are used in weapons distributed by the government for domestic enforcement.  Their projected scenario, I believe, involves limited resistance from people like myself; “gun nuts” and “liberty freaks” who are on the “fringe” of the populous.  At least, that’s what the headlines will say.  In the end, who will care if a few “conspiracy theorists” take a bullet in the quest to end gun violence, right?  But then again…

What I see in America is a much harder stance against gun confiscation than at any time in recent memory, and far less compromising than in the 1990’s.  Gun grabbers are, in my view, walking into a hornets nest.  Most average firearms enthusiast may be less aware of the deeper problems at hand, but they know when they are about to be raped, and will react in kind.  We in the Liberty Movement are often accused of “radicalizing” people against government authority, but I have to say, if that is the case, then the Feds are doing a much better job than we ever could.

Simultaneously, the UN (which most gun owners despise) is helping matters along by using the recent Sandy Hook shooting as a springboard for a reintroduction of their failed international Small Arms Treaty:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/un-arms-treaty-nra_n_2373417.html

"European and other U.N. delegates who support the arms trade treaty told Reuters on condition of anonymity they hoped Newtown would boost support for the convention in the United States, where gun control is an explosive political issue."

"Newtown has opened the debate within the United States on weapons controls in ways that it has not been opened in the past," Abramson said, adding that "the conversation within the U.S. will give the (Obama) administration more leeway."

The UN has always claimed that their small arms treaty would NOT restrict private gun ownership in the U.S., and that it only deals with the international trade of illicit arms.  Yet, they try to use gun control actions in the face of Sandy Hook as a rationale for reopening negotiations?  They can't have it both ways.  Either they are trying to tie the treaty to domestic gun ownership in the U.S, or they aren't.  Will our government sign on to an international agreement to restrict private gun ownership on top of Feinstein's gun grab bill?  

To put this in the most basic terms: registration and restriction equals revolution.  Count on it.  It is not a matter of what we "want", it is a matter of what is necessary.  Without a citizenry armed with weapons of military application, we lose our last deterrent to tyranny, and thus, we lose everything.  When backed into a corner, a victim has two options: he can lie down and die, or, he can fight regardless of the odds.  Sadly, this is where we are in America; fear, servitude, subservience, or civil war.

Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws - Edward Abbey

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot's picture

disruptions have long been a tool of revolutionaries/freedom fighters/insurgents. see the book global guerillas. disruptions can be very  effective tools of resistance

F. Bastiat's picture

Not in today's interconnected world. The fastest way to turn public opinion against your cause is to interrupt logistics networks and power distribution.

Your thinking is a full century behind.

WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot's picture

not necessarily. like you said in you prior post, its about precision. the very interconnectedness of the system is its greatest weakness. i dont necessarily disagree with you, it just seems like systems disruption eventually becomes on of the weapons of choice. as an initial tactic, its bad for gaining public support but once things are underway, its inevitable.

economics9698's picture

In Iraq a handful, of insurgents held off the US Army for 8 long fucking years with AK’s, sniper rifles the equivalent of 30-06, and roadside bombs.

Don’t fucking give in to this shit we cannot have a revolution.  When the day comes we cannot have a revolution the bastard Zionist government will start herding all the goyim into the fucking cyanide ovens.

We better be ready for a revolution against the Zionist mother fuckers.

When the military power between civilians and the government becomes imbalanced two things happen:

1.  The government has no fear.

2.  The government starts genocide programs of extermination.

Don’t let these bastards fool you, the day you turn in your guns is the day they start shipping you off to be eliminated.

 

Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus's picture

every time you're tempted to say joos or zionists, just say bankers or international bankers.

 

more or less what you're getting at, more accurate, and will make people more receptive...

 

I'm not sure my dentist is in on the plan to rule the world from Jerusalem, you know>?

mkhs's picture

What if they wrote a law and nobody noticed? 

Any anticonstitutional law is invalid and void.  Ignore it.

NeedtoSecede's picture

Is there a realistic way for us to all just stop payin our taxes?  If we just all said Fuck You on Jan 1, took leaves from our jobs and sucked it up for a few months while the beast is starved and killed.  It really wouldn't take that long for the beast to die would it?  It is so close to crashing we just need to give it a little nudge...

Anyway, Secession is looking better every day isn't ZHers?

And I just added another name to the list: Fuck You Timmah, Fuck You Berspankme and FUCK YOU Diane Feinstein!

Citxmech's picture

You don't target your own communities - preventing commerce or turning off the lights in your home town isn't the idea.

Resistance needs to focus on what will impede your adversary.

WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot's picture

thats what im saying. just look at the response on zh to the sandy storm. most people basically said to hell with them and were happy to watch ny get flushed. lots were haping for dc too. i doubt many would shed a tear if dc went dark for six months. dont shit where you eat and dont willfully remain in cities that are high priority targets.

NeedtoSecede's picture

And while I am sure there are a lot of nice people in CA, I have been secretly wishing for "The BIG One" to hit and slide that muther and all its dysfunction into the Pacific.  Will we really miss LA and San Francisco that much?  Not!

economics9698's picture

If we could get the Midwestern states and at least 50% of the military to support a new country we could be over this nightmare in as little as 5 years.

Yes we can!

Citxmech's picture

The funny (ironic, not ha ha) part about this is you could just recyle the Declaration of Independance, crossing out the parts naming England and King George, and it'd be pretty spot-on as written.

F. Bastiat's picture

There are 27 offenses submitted to a candid world in the Declaration. By my count, the despot has committed seven of those listed. Along with others, new ones.

NeedtoSecede's picture

+100 E9698.

Flyover country plus the south.  Ag, energy, transportation and most of the big military bases are in that dirt.

AnonymousAnarchist's picture

There are approximately 75,000,000 gun owners in the US. If even 1% of those owners were to resist confiscation, the government would need to fill about 750,000 body bags. Most of those gun owners are sufficiently obedient now so it wouldn't make much sense for the US government to go gun grabbing unless they wanted civil unrest.

ejmoosa's picture

Just 750k of body bags will be needed? And just who do you think will be in those body bags?

 

 

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

 

...a big-boned American, a hybrid Suburban, Church's grilled chicken, and a bag of non-psychoactive drugs from CVS? 

Freddie's picture

The Patriot Prepper Nurse on youtube says a guy like this is one of the first to die when the SHTF.   My guess is he is diabetic or close.  His fat ass will not make it down the street.   He probably will make a fine feast for the zombies.

catacl1sm's picture

95% of people wouldn't know what to do and would stay out of it. You only need about 1% of the 80 Million gun owners to get involved. 800,000 vs the militaries what, 250k, much of which is involved overseas and even those that are here wouldnt' fight americans.

F. Bastiat's picture

The despot's swarms of officers mostly reside at the IRS.  To a lesser extent at the other central bureaus like HHS, HUD, and Labour.  That's the extent of it.

Citxmech's picture

Look at how effective the federal "revenuers" were during prohibition.  The locals banded together to protect their local moonshiners.

Look at how well drug prohibition has worked.

This will be the same thing.  What I'm waiting for is the first state to pass a law in direct contravention to federal restrictions regarding guns (like WA has done with pot).

I think there are plenty of local law enforcement that won't cooperate with the IRS/FBI/BATF/DHS goons when push comes to shove.

Get your Gadsden flags ready to fly.

Agent P's picture

It's a good thing these agencies aren't stocking up on large quantities of ammunition!

N. B. Forrest's picture

I know many guys in the military and not a one would fight for this dictator against the American people.  And there are countless former military men who still take there oath seriously. 

 

Yes a civil war is coming.  The bigger question is how will it play out geographically. 

CH1's picture

I know many guys in the military and not a one would fight for this dictator against the American people.

Right, and that's why the elite will never let it appear that there is a dictator.

The military will be insulated, the officers replaced with obedient cogs, and they WILL follow orders.

Shell Game's picture

Recently received my Oath Keepers hat and patches for my BDUs.

 

 

Obey the Oath, bitchez, disobey POS orders..

Shell Game's picture

Though, I do agree.  

The military will be insulated

As in drone war rooms.  In this way a few obedient trators can inflict much damage in the name of Empire.

Harbanger's picture

In 2008 obama said, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

A new Civilian National Security force?  That means he doesn't wan't to ban guns from all civilians, he only wants to re-distribute them to certain civilians.

Pseudo Anonym's picture

that may be true,

... in the military and not a one would fight for this dictator against the American people

but that is why there is a military cooperation with the canadian forces that will not have a problem taking out americans and american military will not have a problem taking out canadian civilians

http://www.wnd.com/2008/02/57228/

http://newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news38.htm

Freddie's picture

The military has been F over in a major way by this govt.  Far more than usual. Bush sucked and jerked the troops around but Marines applauded him.  Watch any video with the mullah and Marines. The kids in Afghanistan are left there to rot with no mission, with orders not to shoot back most of the time.  Where they get killed or blown up by the friendlies.  A military where the soldiers cannot carry sidearms on base and can be killed like dogs by moles like Major Hassan.  Yeah - I bet the military likes this govt.

Florida now has over 1 million CCWs.  Pennsylvania has over 650,000 licensed hunters.  PA, NY, MI, TX and OH or WI (five states) have about 5 milion licensed hunters.  Most of them probably have scoped rifles. 

There have been an average of 15 million NIC checks per year for the past 4 years.  This is probably 60 million more guns that have been bought in 4 years.

F. Bastiat's picture

My local gun shop, in the mid-Atlantic was completely sold out of 5.56 mm ammo yesterday and completely sold out of modern sporting rifles. The walls were bare, except for a few shotguns.  Seriously.

Fedaykinx's picture

You have to be ready when the email notification comes in that stuff is in stock online, because it's going to sell out FAST.  Doesn't matter what it is, mags, ammo, whatever.  If you see it locally, buy it.

Freddie's picture

It is nuts.  Rifles are all gone.  Handguns are selling out especially Glocks.

Titus Flavius Caesar Vespasianus Augustus's picture

for fuck's sake - DHS *is* an army, and your state and local police are full of fuckwads who will absolutely, positively, go to war on you if and when told.

 

They're going to be doing it for "security" and defend against "terrorism" - and they've likely kept the potential troublemakers in Iraq/AfPak and just shipped more to Israel and Africa.

 

Don't you get it??  They want and are prepared for a shooting war.

 

It'd be much better to choke off their supply of tax revenue and/or make an end-run around the Fed and its fiat issuance.

 

A non-Fed currency used by the citizens is worth 10 divisions.

Fedaykinx's picture

Depends on where you live, I reckon.  My local LEO's aren't brain surgeons but they're not completely stupid either.  They know they'd be massively outnumbered if they started following orders like that.

Freddie's picture

If things get really bad - the cops are home protecting their families.   Where were cops in LA during the riots?  Probably protecting any streets leading to Beverly Hills and Santa Monica.

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

Read this book...

"What no one seemed to notice," said a colleague of mine, a philologist, "was the ever widening gap, after 1933, between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know, it doesn’t make people close to their government to be told that this is a people’s government, a true democracy, or to be enrolled in civilian defense, or even to vote. All this has little, really nothing, to do with knowing one is governing.

"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html

F. Bastiat's picture

Aurel Kolnai documented the "socialism" of German National Socialism very well.

 

A sample, here: http://www.savageleft.com/poli/watw-seven.html

XitSam's picture

The patriot/statist split is key, in both law enforcement & military. The split will vary across the country. I don't have good feelings about big city cops. Leadership ranks will have a strong influence, county sheriffs, company commanders. The peaceful expression to local LEO of resistance strength will be important. Yahoos that shoot up a deputy's car to show how tough they are will swing LE the wrong way. LE will band together if attacked. Expect local false flag attcks (by union activists for example).

Fedaykinx's picture

The range of scenarios that could potentially play out across this country will be as many and varied as there are differences in geography and demographics.  the united states is quite a large place.

F. Bastiat's picture

Too big, IMO. That's part of the problem. Splitting it into two countries would actually be sensible. Chart their own courses.

Citxmech's picture

During the Rodney King riots, I distinctly remember seeing Korean store owners on their roofs with HK MP-5s guarding their stores on TV - and never saw any indication that the police did anything about it - and that was in Feinstein's Kalifrornia.

I have a feeling if you are otherwise a pillar of the community and keep a somewhat low profile - you'll be left alone.

I'll bet you most cops wouldn't register all of their own personal weapons. 

Jreb's picture

We have a large law enforcement clientel. Most of them are as concerned about things as everyone else. The guys that scare me are the goons in places like the TSA. They are uneducated, arrogant and looking for trouble.

tip e. canoe's picture

A non-Fed currency used by the citizens is worth 10 divisions.

indeed... silver is for secrets (according to goog auto-suggest)

Motorhead's picture

He looks pretty good since he lost weight.

 

Harlequin001's picture

You never know, if you watch closely you might see him break into an emergency shuffle...