User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Armed Citizens must be prepared to defend their neighborhoods if the police won't

  1. #11
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Standing Wolf View Post
    Does anyone else, however, see how the idea of "preemptive fire" might be misconstrued in some minds to include and justify firing on a group of unarmed protesters whose mere presence frightens them? I've expressed similar reservations about this kind of rhetoric before and been accused of (paraphrasing) siding with the rioters, advocating for just letting people burn and loot at will, etc. Let's be reasonable - it's not one extreme or the other. It isn't shoot any group of people who come within a block of your home or business or roll over and play dead. Not every gun owner is well balanced and reasonable, and there are most definitely individuals who honestly would like nothing better than to be presented with the opportunity to shoot some people and get away with it. Let's not be naive or pretend that those people don't exist.
    Under normal conditions, I'd agree with you. These are not normal conditions, so I'd say mow 'em down. In all likelihood, once will be enough. And if it isn't, and heaven forbid, things escalate, then it was justified.

    That's my opinion.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Lummy For This Useful Post:

    Perianne (09-11-2020)

  3. #12

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 74,315, Level: 66
    Level completed: 51%, Points required for next Level: 1,135
    Overall activity: 14.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Cletus's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    195695
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    32,312
    Points
    74,315
    Level
    66
    Thanks Given
    3,680
    Thanked 27,380x in 15,849 Posts
    Mentioned
    412 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Standing Wolf View Post
    [/COLOR]The bolded words should concern anyone truly concerned with the rule of law. "Preemptive fire"? A violent, armed mob moving into your neighborhood, actually threatening lives and property, with the police nowhere in sight? By all means, whatever is necessary within the bounds of legality. Does anyone else, however, see how the idea of "preemptive fire" might be misconstrued in some minds to include and justify firing on a group of unarmed protesters whose mere presence frightens them? I've expressed similar reservations about this kind of rhetoric before and been accused of (paraphrasing) siding with the rioters, advocating for just letting people burn and loot at will, etc. Let's be reasonable - it's not one extreme or the other. It isn't shoot any group of people who come within a block of your home or business or roll over and play dead. Not every gun owner is well balanced and reasonable, and there are most definitely individuals who honestly would like nothing better than to be presented with the opportunity to shoot some people and get away with it. Let's not be naive or pretend that those people don't exist.


    I concur. I have no problem with shooting first. In fact, I encourage it, BUT only once an imminent threat has been presented. Someone marching through your neighborhood in protest of whatever, is not in itself an imminent threat.
    “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” - Barry Goldwater

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Cletus For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (09-11-2020)

  5. #13
    Points: 52,081, Level: 55
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 469
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    jet57's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    2378
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    19,121
    Points
    52,081
    Level
    55
    Thanks Given
    1,698
    Thanked 2,368x in 2,004 Posts
    Mentioned
    284 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by murdock View Post
    My wife and I and a few of our close neighbors are prepared, but we don't live in a democrat craphole.
    After seeing some of your posts, yes you do.

  6. #14
    Points: 52,081, Level: 55
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 469
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    jet57's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    2378
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    19,121
    Points
    52,081
    Level
    55
    Thanks Given
    1,698
    Thanked 2,368x in 2,004 Posts
    Mentioned
    284 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Calypso Jones View Post
    https://www.americanpartisan.org/202...AT4KwkGEoJCMMX


    So let me be very clear: if Democrat Party governors, mayors and DAs have hamstrung their police for political reasons, and won’t allow them to protect the lives and property of their local citizens using all required force, abandoning their primary mission in order to bow to the ABR mob, then it is time for their undefended citizens to apply the clear intent of the Second Amendment.


    There should be deep regret about the abandonment of the Rule of Law by the Democrat Party political ruling class, but there should be no moral quibbles or hesitation by American citizens concerning the legitimacy of armed community self defense, in the absence of expected law enforcement protection.

    Therefore, it is my carefully considered opinion that black-clad and masked ABR mobs, rampaging and terrorizing innocent citizens under the cover of darkness in the style of the KKK of old, may morally and ethically be taken under preemptive fire by armed citizens at any level necessary to drive them out of their peaceful neighborhoods and away from their businesses, before the terrorists can reach their targets and throw their Molotov $#@!tails and other explosive and incendiary devices.

    As an historical note, it should be understood that the National Rifle Association was founded after the last American Civil War by former Union Army officers, (and Republicans at that), in order to empower freed African-American former slaves to defend themselves with firearms against KKK night raids. In the 19th Century, the Democrat Party, then allied with the Klan, (as the Democrats of today are aligned with Antifa and BLM), had favored strict gun control, in the form of narrowly written laws restricting the legal ownership of firearms by free black citizens.

    The more things change…the more they stay the same.

    Those not willing to use force to defend civilization must be prepared to accept barbarism.
    "The Democrat Party". It's funny how GW Bush's people invented that to separate the Democrats from the word "democratic".

    Running for your guns is a simple propaganda game trying to prop up your "law and order" president who has no respect for either law NOR order. And now of course, the closer it gets to the election, the more the right is going to yell about how the "Liberals" are burning down the country without even a whisper about the issues.

  7. #15
    Points: 29,932, Level: 42
    Level completed: 21%, Points required for next Level: 1,118
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Retirednsmilin308's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5833
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    6,568
    Points
    29,932
    Level
    42
    Thanks Given
    7,875
    Thanked 5,826x in 3,490 Posts
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    What happened in 2012?
    TYPO...I meant 2021.
    When it is not allowed to be questioned, it is not science, it is PROPAGANDA

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Retirednsmilin308 For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (09-11-2020)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts