I Will Not Comply – Civil Disobedience and Gun Control Laws

The word “Resist” seems to have become a liberal battle cry these days. But what most people don’t realize, and what the mainstream media avoids telling the public is that “Resist” is exactly what firearms owners have been doing for literally decades in the face of unconstitutional gun laws. The level of civil disobedience to arbitrary firearms regulation has been truly staggering – and not just in the United States.


Here is a review of some of the most recent examples.


Vermont's Bump Stock Amnesty.

  • 2 bump stocks were surrendered.

New York State - Registration of all “assault weapons”.

  • 4% compliance rate. It estimates that about one million residents of New York State had so-called “assault weapons” at the time of the registration requirement.

Connecticut - Registration of all “assault weapons” and magazines holding 10 rounds or more.

  • 20% compliance rate on guns and 15% on magazines.

California - "Bullet button assault weapons”.

  • 5% compliance rate on the 1.3 million firearms sold in California

Despite what the media and gun grabbing liberals would have us believe, Americans aren’t the only ones resistant to gun registration and confiscation schemes either. Resistance in other countries is also quite high.


Remember the Australian model of gun control that Hillary and Obama kept going on and on about? What they didn’t tell you is that Australia’s “Buyback”/Confiscation achieved only an estimated 20% compliance rate. Hundreds of thousands of firearms owners in Australia did not cooperate. As a result, in the “be careful what you wish for” department, there is now a raging black market in firearms in that country.


Canada instituted a long gun registration scheme back in 1995. Not only did retrospective studies fail to demonstrate a positive effect on homicide rates,  those “Nice Canadians” largely failed to register their long guns until the shockingly expensive scheme (some 2 billion dollars) collapsed under its own weight and was scrapped in 2012. If those notably polite and law-abiding Canadians refused to comply, why would anyone expect that Americans would react any differently?


With all of this evidence that gun control schemes not only don’t work, but that civilian populations are uncooperative and even contemptuous of such laws, WHY do liberal gun grabbers continue to push such an agenda? 


They apparently fail to remember the adage that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. What that adage says about them is not particularly complimentary.


If nothing else, this data is heartening for gun owners. Our brothers and sisters in arms are not lying down in the face of arbitrary and unconstitutional gun legislation. They are fighting in the courts, and fighting in the only other peaceful ways available to them – by exercising their right to vote, and by refusing to comply.



Autumn Cote Added Nov 4, 2018 - 8:32am
Please note, it's against the rules to post articles here unless you comment on the work of others more frequently than you currently do.  
Lindsay Wheeler Added Nov 4, 2018 - 9:20pm
Long uphill battle against the Marxists in America. 
Doug Plumb Added Nov 4, 2018 - 10:20pm
People could be armed to the teeth, waiting for that so called SWAT home invasion by morons. But they will pick you up at the grocery store or on your way to work. That's what the Bolsheviks did when the farmers had the same guns that the establishment did.
Doug Plumb Added Nov 4, 2018 - 10:22pm
Actually, everyone is enjoying the convenience and safety from purse snatchers that electronic money provides them. They will just shut people off and they won't need cops or a military, just prisons to place and experiment on those whom they shut off.
  Anyone who regularly uses electronic money has a low IQ and is probably unsuitable for a technological society anyways.
Kristen Foley Added Nov 5, 2018 - 6:35am
It’s not civil disobedience to break a law nobody knows your breaking.  Ala, gun owners not complying with all gun laws.  Someone is being civilly disobedient when they break laws in plain sight.  Ala, vandalism.
Ward Tipton Added Nov 5, 2018 - 7:33am
"People could be armed to the teeth, waiting for that so called SWAT home invasion by morons. But they will pick you up at the grocery store or on your way to work. That's what the Bolsheviks did when the farmers had the same guns that the establishment did."
This is America, the cops just shoot them.
David Koresh went into town twice a week alone ... they could easily have picked him up alone. 
opher goodwin Added Nov 5, 2018 - 7:52am
Yep everyone needs an assault rifle and an automatic and there's no correlation between the extremely high rate of gun deaths and gun ownership - what's a few schools, concerts, churches and synagogues. It's a price well worth paying.
Dino Manalis Added Nov 5, 2018 - 8:48am
 Civil disobedience is a matter of personal resistance, while some gun control is needed, but the focus should be on evaluating people's minds to make sure they're not a threat to themselves and others.  For many, gun ownership is self-defense and has to be realized.
opher goodwin Added Nov 5, 2018 - 8:59am
Dino - minds change in minutes! Emotions are powerful things! Anger is quick! Adrenalin blinds people! Fear clouds judgement!
opher goodwin Added Nov 5, 2018 - 9:01am
I just hope that the people supporting this carnage are prepared to meet with the people who have lost their loved ones or who are maimed and tell them that it's your right!
Ward Tipton Added Nov 5, 2018 - 9:06am
"Yep everyone needs an assault rifle and an automatic and there's no correlation between the extremely high rate of gun deaths and gun ownership - what's a few schools, concerts, churches and synagogues. It's a price well worth paying."
Ever had to protect your livestock from thirty or forty marking coyotes running through your property on a moonless night? 
Automatic weapons have been banned since the 1920s I believe ... though I would have to look up the exact date. 
There actually is a surprising correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths and even violent crime. The larger the portion of the population that is legally armed, the lower the violent crime rates are. In areas where firearms are illegal, those people that carry them are not generally impacted by or concerned with the law. Compare Kennesaw, Georgia and Chicago, Illinois as two examples. I will give you a hint: Gun ownership is mandatory (another law I do not agree with) in Kennesaw for all but those with debilitating mental conditions and those with religious beliefs preventing ownership of firearms and they have an effective violent crime rate of zero percent. 
Marty Koval Added Nov 5, 2018 - 9:07am
The estimates for the number of privately owned guns in the USA is 300 to 350 million. The population of the USA is 326 million. 99.99% of the gun owners are legal and responsible gun owners, who do not kill people.
The gun deaths, excluding suicides in 2017 was 15,549 people. A very high percentage of these gun deaths were done by evil people, with criminal records who stole or purchase guns on the black market.
If all guns were banned in the USA, which some people would desire, would have not stopped one of these murders. Just like in Europe, which has banned guns or highly restricted them, evil people continue to kill, because of their evil and harden hearts.
It is not the guns that kill, it is the evil harden hearts of people. Prior to guns being invented in 10th century, millions of people were being killed by a multitude of means.
Ward Tipton Added Nov 5, 2018 - 9:16am
With over a hundred million guns in our possession, if we were violent and threatening ... you would know it! And if we were as violent as people claimed, we would be the only people left. 
opher goodwin Added Nov 5, 2018 - 10:05am
Marty - the rate at which people are killed by guns in the US outstrips most places. The mass shootings are usually carried out by people who have guns legally.
Bowers has an active license and has made at least six known firearm purchases since 1996
The United States has had more mass shootings than any other country.
Stephen Paddock legally bought  many semiautomatics.

Las Vegas shooting
59 (inc. the perp.)
851 (422 from gunfire)

Semi-automatic rifles and revolver

Eric D Beyer Added Nov 5, 2018 - 2:32pm
Opher, the leading cause of death in the USA is not guns, it is opioids.  There is no way, law or no law, that Americans will give up their guns. God made man, Samuel Colt made all men equal.
Marty Koval Added Nov 5, 2018 - 4:02pm
There are over 300-350 million guns in the USA, that resulted in 15,449 deaths in 2017. Many people say because of these deaths, guns should be banned or greatly restricted.
Now consider these facts concerning automobiles and trucks. There are 263.6 million cars and trucks in the USA that killed 40,100 people. The death rate for automobiles and trucks is 2.6 times more than from guns.
Many of the automobile and truck accidents are caused by: Speeding, distraction due to cell phones and other electronic devices, driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, driving too fast for weather conditions, and talking with others and not concentrating on driving.
Based on the logic people use to ban guns, the focus should be put on banning or greatly restricting automobiles and trucks. Why, because they kill far more people. Of course the vast majority of people would say that is not fair, because we depend on our vehicles for our livelihood and leisure.
Just like the people who say we depend on our automobiles and trucks, gun owners depend on their guns for security, protection, hunting and marksmanship.
The other point to keep in mind, the USA constitutions states in the second amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
There is nothing in the USA constitutions that states that cars and trucks are a guarantee right.
FacePalm Added Nov 5, 2018 - 4:20pm
"I believe [that William Graham Sumner] was one of the greatest professors we ever had at Yale, but I have drawn far away from his point of view, that of the old laissez faire doctrine. I remember he said in his classroom: 'Gentlemen, the time is coming when there will be two great classes, Socialists, and Anarchists. The Anarchists want the government to be nothing, and the Socialists want government to be everything. There can be no greater contrast. Well, the time will come when there will be only these two great parties, the Anarchists, representing the laissez faire doctrine and the Socialists, representing the extreme view on the other side, and when that time comes I am an Anarchist.' That amused his class very much, for he was as far from a revolutionary as you could expect. But I would like to say that if that time comes when there are two great parties, Anarchists and Socialists, then I am a Socialist."
-- Irving Fisher
Source: before the Yale Socialist Club in 1941, quoted in Mark Thorton, The Economics of Prohibition (University of Utah Press, 1991), p. 17

As should be obvious to anyone who reads posts here regularly, i would consider the author of this citation to be an enemy of liberty and America itself, and would be a great fan of Sumner.
During the Watts riots, rather long ago, now, East Asian businessmen, concerned about the rampaging, got together behind barricades and successfully defended their businesses from looters by means of their large magazines and semi-automatics.
But always remember and never forget at least 2 things: first, the 2nd Amendment prohibits the general gov't from infringing upon the keeping and bearing of ANY arms whatsoever(during the War of 1812, many private ships were well-armed with cannon, for example), so if you have a rail-gun, a microwave weapon or a laser, you're perfectly free to use it to defend yourself, your family, friends, neighbors and town from attack by anyone or group of someones, from street thugs to bullies with badges to foreign enemy armies.
The second thing to recall is that DC v Heller was absolutely NOT necessary, and a secondary consequence of that ruling was to imply that federal gov't agents DO have the right to regulate the possession of certain arms; all they really needed to do was cite the relevant portion of US v Cruikshank, declare "res adjudicata," and move on.  Here is the aforementioned portion:
"[The Right to Keep and Bear Arms] is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed;...  This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government,…".  U.S. v. Cruikshank Et Al. 92 U.S. 542 (1875).
Note the date, a decade after cessation of hostilities.
As to machine guns, the common myth is that their ownership is forbidden.  One may obtain a relatively inexpensive license for them, or used to be able to.  There've been a lot of obscene and Unconstitutional "laws" put in place since 911.
Good thing for Americans that multiple courts have ruled that Unconstitutional laws are not laws, to wit:
 'An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.' Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442
If i recall correctly, i have at least 3 more examples citing US law (if anyone dares disbelieve me) which i won't hesitate to post should any challenge this assertion...or request them for their own records.
There are only 2 kinds of people in this world; those who can and will defend themselves, and victims waiting to be victimized.  Even the former can be victims, but at least they have a chance; those who choose to remain unarmed do not.
Marty Koval Added Nov 5, 2018 - 4:38pm
Excellent response and thanks for the historical insight.
FacePalm Added Nov 5, 2018 - 5:13pm
Thanks, Marty-
i have one (ok, for now) more contribution to this thread along the lines of what you posted just prior to me:
Accidental deaths:
Number of physicians in the U.S.............................700,000
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year....120,000
Accidental deaths per physician...................................0.171.ns
Number of gun owners in the U.S...............................80,000,000
Number of accidental gun deaths per year...........................1,500
Accidental deaths per gun owner...................................0.000018
Therefore, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 5, 2018 - 5:48pm
And you fascists want to take peopl'e rights to sue doctors away as "torte reform, suggesting if we have that, the cost of healthcare won't rise.  You can conflate doctors and guns, but HaHaHaHaHa....you rightists are so transparent, murderous and cruel, period.  And Faced, with his usual hysteria, wants you to be afraid if you aren't armed to hold "Them" off....And Faced sucks Geezus' dick on WB every chance he gets, believes in UFOs, little grey men and no gun control laws.  Brilliant. 
Susitna Added Nov 5, 2018 - 5:56pm
To Marty: What I hate to hear is the argument that guns are dangerous. I could kill somebody with a chair or with a pillow for that matter! What is dangerous is when people cannot defend themselves and only the bad guys have guns. Guns are always portrayed as a bad thing to own. The communists never want to address the defensive part of owning a gun. 
Jeff Michka Added Nov 5, 2018 - 6:08pm
And on que, here comes the semi-offical RNC "organizer," Sustainpeddle, talking "The communists".  Wow are all those bad "communists" expressing Marxist, Leninist, or Stalinist tenets, and what are those, in context, Sustainpeddle the rightist shill?  Gee. Sustainpeddle, why aren't youo calling for armed rightists to head to the border to fight off the MS13 invaders?  Partisan shill Sustainpeddle.
Marty Koval Added Nov 5, 2018 - 6:52pm
What is obvious in this forum, is that some people do not understand the following:
The First Amendment protects the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment protects the First Amendment.
If you lose one, you will eventually lose the other. You see this battle accelerating by the left via political correctness (limiting speech) and the gun grabbers who want to ban guns. When this occurs tyranny takes over and this is the left's ultimate goal.
The good news is, it will never happen. The gun owners in America represent the largest informal army in the world.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 5, 2018 - 9:14pm
Yeah, right, Koval.  You'll take your guns and protect leftists right to free speech, and I'm taking the next SpaceEX flight to Mars.  You'd help ensure not a leftist was left alive to speak.  Hypocrite.  An "informal Army?"  I can just see ol Marty, shoulder to shoulder with TraitorLynn and Rusted Smith on the barricades facing off against tanks.  On top of being a bible banger, you are a rightist romantic, and hence, fool.
opher goodwin Added Nov 6, 2018 - 5:45am
Susitna - I think if you were to go to a synagogue armed with a pillow and try to wipe out the congregation you might find it fairly unsuccessful. Likewise throwing pillows or chairs out of a hotel window overlooking a concert in Las Vegas would also prove ineffective.
Marty Koval Added Nov 6, 2018 - 8:38am
Jeff Michka:
The first amendment gives you the freedom to express what your beliefs are, just like it gives me the same freedom of speech. If that time came when the government said it is going to restrict or ban free speech, I will be there fighting for free speech for ALL, including yourself.
Free speech is necessary so people don't get pigeonholed into one way of thinking that might be totally wrong. Restriction of, or outright refusal to accept other viewpoints leads to narrow mindedness, and mental faculty to see beyond the superficial and recognize the underlying truth. Many times this leads to bigotry and lack of trust of other positions.
When people abandonment other view points, the more closed minded, polarized and angry they get with others' who have other beliefs. This a slippery and dangerous road to be on.
FacePalm Added Nov 6, 2018 - 9:47am
Technically, the Constitution "gives" nothing; never has, never will.  It was written specifically to define and LIMIT the powers general government actors could lawfully take.
The Founding Fathers expressed many times and in many ways that We the People have "natural rights" which proceed from Our Creator - no man nor body of men.  This is the very thing which makes them unalienable.
The Founders had observed nature carefully - and read many books by many wise people - and saw that nature provides every creature with means of defense against predators.  With Man, it is our ability to utilize tools to create means of defense which are natural and right for all...which would be one reason for the saying that Sam Colt made all equal, in that a 70lb 80yr old lady can defend herself quite well against a 270lb male attacker.
Thomas Paine wrote:
"A Constitution is not the act of a government, but a PEOPLE constituting a government, and government without a Constitution is power without a right.  All power exercised over a nation must have some beginning.  It must either be delegated, or assumed.  All delegated power is trust; all assumed power is usurpation..."
'Course, gov't agents usurp powers not delegated all the time, but it's up to the People to hold them to account for their faithfulness (or not) to their Oaths of Office, to wit:
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error."
-U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, 1950
i'd venture to assert that the People have not exercised this power anywhere NEAR enough, not yet, anyway...otherwise, there'd BE no Ruby Ridge, no Waco, no Roy Finicum murder w/o accountability.
Eleanore Whitaker Added Nov 6, 2018 - 10:08am
One question remains, since I have lived in NJ my entire life, managed to get through SuperStorm Sandy and 9/11, how is it right wingers who live in Middle America are the ones who have those white trigger happy men who are in reality nothing more than wannabe vigilantes, are the states with the MOST mass murders? 
None in NJ or NY. Why? Because these states don't want guns in our faces on hot subways in summer packed like sardine cans. We don't want idiots walking around playing Rambo in our grocery stores, shopping malls or our churches. 
Now, the Rambo wannabes are armed and play acting at being "militia" where they are bound to cause deaths. 
NY arrested 3 of those Proud Boys within an hour of them playing Brown Shirts on a NY street beating on an innocent man. If you think people north of the Mason Dixon line will put up with that when we are busy staying alert to foreign terrorists, think again. 
The only states that have gun problems are states that have neighbors pulling guns on neighbors in their bizarre paranoid trigger happy world.
NO American needs a military weapon on public streets. If you can't mentally process why, get professional help. 
FacePalm Added Nov 6, 2018 - 4:48pm
Would you be one of those who thinks that ONLY police and military should have firearms?
If so, then you may learn a little from the following:
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated...
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
'Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.' 
-Sarah Brady, Chairman of Handgun Control to Senator Howard Metzanbaum
'The National Educator', January 1994 Page 3
"Under every government, the dernier [Fr. last, or final] resort of the people, is an appeal to the sword; whether to defend themselves against the open attacks of a foreign enemy, or to check the insidious encroachments of domestic foes.  Whenever a people... entrust the defence of their country to a regular, standing army, composed of mercenaries, the power of that country will remain under the direction of the most wealthy citizens."
-- A Framer, Anonymous 'framer' of the US Constitution
Source: Independent Gazetteer, January 29, 1791
(as a hint, both police and military are paid by government entities, ergo they are mercenaries...they are SWORN mercenaries, but since no one afaik has ever been held to account for betraying their oaths, there's no deterrent other than conscience...and fear of the Justice of God.)
Susitna Added Nov 6, 2018 - 5:17pm
To Opher: I see that you didn't get, it like always. Or maybe you are just the second house clown because Jeff is clown no. 1. You guys are so boooooring!
Jeffry Gilbert Added Nov 6, 2018 - 7:31pm
those white trigger happy men
What a typical DUHmerican man hating cuntish fuckin statement. 
opher goodwin Added Nov 6, 2018 - 8:12pm
Susitna - no I get it. You talk shit about guns, pillows and chairs and excuse the huge numbers of gun casualties. It's madness. But you have this crazy idea that because something was written by a group of Brits hundreds of years ago you have to abide by it. It is set in stone. No matter how stupid it is. It is your right.
opher goodwin Added Nov 6, 2018 - 8:16pm
Eleanore - spot on. Who wants lunatics with short fuses walking around armed to the teeth. I'm just glad I don't live there.
Marty Koval Added Nov 6, 2018 - 9:43pm
For all the people who want to restrict or ban guns, you need to consider these statistics.
Every day, 29 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This is one death every 50 minutes and 10,497 annually. The annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $44 billion. Drugs other than alcohol (legal and illegal) are involved in about 16% of motor vehicle crashes and deaths.
The weapon of choice was a motor vehicle (automobile, truck or motorcycle). Should all these vehicles be banned or highly restricted? Most likely you will say NO WAY. And I would totally agree with you on this. The reason is: The impaired, irresponsible, mentally brainwashed, and maybe angry driver was the killer.
Without an impaired, mentally disturbed driver, an automobile, truck or motorcycle is not a killing machine. The same is with a gun. The gun does not discharge by itself and become a killing tool to kill people. It takes an impaired, mentally disturbed and evil person to pull the trigger.
Many will say, we must have more intensive background checks and mental evaluation of people before they can purchase a gun. If this is done, then it needs to be done for all drivers who want to purchase a motor vehicle. Why? Because the gun and motor vehicles are potential weapons that can kill.
Now many will say, I must be out of my mind to make such recommendations. You will state that the vast majority of drivers of vehicles are sane and responsible people. Why would you make the vast majority of people go through this time consuming process, because of a few bad and irresponsible drivers. And I agree.
If we do this for people who want to buy and drive a vehicle. Then we should also do it to for people who want to buy a gun. If you disagree, then you are stating it is ok to discriminate against gun owners.
When you believe discrimination is ok, then you open the door to discriminate against anyone you disagree with. This is a very dangerous and slippery slope to go down. Where will it end? Will it eventually come around and you will become the next victim of discrimination?
Jim Stoner Added Nov 7, 2018 - 4:53am
I follow your argument--people who want to buy guns should have a license to do so.  Just like driving.  I agree. 
Or you can join the National Guard and the gun will be provided to you, but it's not free. 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Nov 7, 2018 - 6:56am
people who want to buy guns should have a license to do so.
The thoughts of a statist. 
Let's take away all your rights and license them back to you for a fee. 
FacePalm Added Nov 7, 2018 - 10:24am
Those who are licensed are registered, their info in a database. 
Ever hear of the "Anschluss"?  When the people of Austria voted to merge with ze Reich, the first thing the SS guys did was go to the office which handled firearm(and ammunition!) registration, then knew exactly what arms and how many rounds each on the list had.  Made it easy to target them for confiscation.
No, thanks.
Besides, it has long been a principle of American law that if you license a Right, it becomes a privilege.
It is literally against the law to license a Right.  What next?  A fee to practice your religion?  Another to speak your mind?
Jeffry Gilbert is right, Jim; your position is that of a statist.
If you'd like to gain some more understanding, i cannot recommend more highly a book by Albert Nock called "Our Enemy, the State."  It it, he admirably delineates the differences between good governance and the fictional entity called "the state."  Last time i checked, there were multiple online sources where it can be dl'ed for free.
Susitna Added Nov 7, 2018 - 3:20pm
To Opher: No you didn't get it because you only listen to yourself.  After the Boston terror attack, we would have had to ban pressure cookers or after London's attack several vans. So, now once again and really slowly.
It is not the guns that are "bad", people are and you can use anything to kill somebody. But I know, my examples destroy the pseudo-argument that you have been repeating for decades.
What are we suppose to do if only bad guys have a gun or maybe only a communist government? Ah, yes! We can sing a love song from the sixties!
There are even Presidents, like Obama, who delivered guns to criminals in Mexico and you can talk about this matter with the mourning families from fallen border patrols. No, it is not a conspiracy theory but this will be your standard reply. But I know that you are cool and above everything and everybody. You can even write the word "shit"! Wow!
Jeff Michka Added Nov 7, 2018 - 7:04pm
Here the big day after the grand Trumpist election victory yesterday crying about border patrol people that lost their lives "fighting off the invading hoards."  Eleanore rightfully (not rightist) kinda wondered why rural America needs military style armaments in "Flyover America."  Well, these are the same Trumpists that think invading armies of women and children in strollers are about to swarm over them and kill and rape all those "good white people" as they sleep.  You know...hysterics.  And this hysteria is a reason they should remain unarmed.  I own firearms, but wouldn't have a problem licensing or registering them should we be asked.  I'm not a criminal, or about to commit a gun crime or advocate the violent overthrow of our government.  I'm not a government out-to-get-us paranoid.
Ward Tipton Added Nov 7, 2018 - 8:23pm
I have provided scenarios wherein high capacity magazines are necessary. The founding fathers laid out many a discussion about why the people should have the same access to weaponry as any standing army as well. 
FacePalm Added Nov 7, 2018 - 9:02pm
Exactly, Ward-
Not least among these was to have a "minute-man" militia armed with the latest weaponry so as to take on any enemies, foreign or domestic, whenever State or National gov't agents needed them.
This is where America attempted to emulate Switzerland, and many Americans to this very day advocate similar policies for us.  i am certainly one.
At the time, of course, there were external dangers from England and Spain(not so much the French, after the Louisiana Purchase), as well as internal dangers from ordinary criminals and Native Americans.
Despite the bullshit being spread by D'Opher, the ideal of the "noble savage" was quite rare; this is not to say there were NONE such, but that they were few - and even among them, the art of making your captured enemies scream as long as possible had been honed to a fine, albeit perverse, art - providing yet another extraordinary motivation to remain armed.
Even today, too many home invaders to list have routinely engaged in binding and torturing people in their homes, usually to persuade the victim to give up the location of the valuables/bank card #s, but just as often because the freaks enjoy it.
In typical home invasions, a gang of people will rush the door, often more than 6, thus making a typical snub-nose revolver inadequate to meet the task at hand.  Having a MUCH more powerful firearm(s) or other device is simply as prudent as having a fully-charged fire extinguisher handy "just in case."
It's that "just in case" that'll make you damn glad you're able to defend yourself/family in that event - as opposed to watching your wife or daughter being tortured while you're tied up and unable to make them stop...or alternatively, for the wife and children being forced to watch YOU being tortured.
Marty Koval Added Nov 7, 2018 - 9:11pm
Here are a couple of reasons why a gun owner needs high capacity magazines:
Multiple assailants. Whether on the street or during a home invasion, violent criminals often move in pairs or packs. Realize that you will never shoot as well as your score at the range when you are under the unbelievable stress of a life-or-death encounter. Which would you prefer to have in your magazine in such an event? Ten rounds? Or fifteen or seventeen? Or perhaps even 30?
Civil disturbances. Watch the Reginald Denny beating video some time. Review the looting insanity of Hurricane Katrina. You’ve got a crazed mob of ten, twenty, or fifty people headed in your direction. Are ten rounds enough? Might you want fifteen, or seventeen, or even thirty?
Your assailants may well be armed with high capacity magazines themselves. No ban will affect these criminals; it will actually encourage them. Do you really think the gang bangers care about federal laws?
It is always wise to plan for the worst case scenario and hope for the best.
FacePalm Added Nov 7, 2018 - 10:37pm
Absolutely right, Marty.
This principle has been in play since before the founding of this country, as Patrick Henry notes:
“We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts... I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.”
Patrick Henry
Some may pooh-pooh the notion as "scare-tactics" or "paranoia," or some such nonsense, but they're fools; many's the young driver who felt the exact same way about drinking and driving, that "it'll never happen to me-eee," - 'til it DOES.
i feel the same way about tools; i'd much rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.  With the barbarians at the gate, it's a little late to say, "gee, i shoulda gotten a couple firearms," ain't it?
Marty Koval Added Nov 8, 2018 - 9:17am
There are many fools in this world. Fools are destitute of reason, or the common powers of understanding; and an idiot. Some persons are born fools, and are called natural fools; others may become fools by some injury done to the brain, particularly via drugs and alcohol. The Bible talks about fools a lot, because there has been multitudes of fools in this world for eons:
Proverbs 13:20 Walk with the wise and become wise, for a companion of fools suffers harm.
Proverbs 14:6 - The mocker seeks wisdom and finds none, but knowledge comes easily to the discerning.
Proverbs 14:8 - The wisdom of the prudent is to give thought to their ways, but the folly of fools is deception.
Proverbs 18:2 - Fools find no pleasure in understanding  but delight in airing their own opinions.
Proverbs 26:11 - As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools repeat their folly.
Proverbs 27:22 - Though you grind a fool in a mortar, grinding them like grain with a pestle, you will not remove their folly from them.
The world is full of fools, and he who would not see it should live alone and smash his mirror.
Eleanore Whitaker Added Nov 8, 2018 - 9:26am
Marty, Check back in the 15th and 16th centuries' history. Rabid extremists back then were immediately shipped off to mental asylums. Court jesters who danced and entertained royalty were called "fools." 
The band Black Sabbath once wrote lyrics that always stick in my mind, "The world is full of kings and queens. They'll rob your soul and steal your dreams." 
I do not agree that Barack Obama is a fool. Nor Dwight D. Eisenhower, General MacArthur, Winston Churchill (let me know when you can compete with one), Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Madame Curie, Michaelangelo, Tesla or Wordsworth. 
We who have no reservations about facing and confronting the truth can only pity men like you. You hold on for dear life to some bizarre strain of manic depression you hope will become pandemic to all society. 
This is why we inoculate with vaccines. 
Eleanore Whitaker Added Nov 8, 2018 - 9:38am
By the way folks, Matthew Whitaker,Trump's newly installed hatchet man of the Mueller investigtion is not to my knowledge a relative of my late ex, whose name I continue to use because I am not done making him proud of it. 
Trump is now following the same path as Nixon before Nixon was forced to resign: Fire Sessions (not that that is a huge) ONLY to shut down a federal investigation. 
Now really, how paranoid is Trump that his dirty business will come out? He is not afraid of losing the WH. He is deadly fearful that his dirty business will come out and rightfully put him in prison where he has belonged for decades. 
Nixon fired Cox replaced him with Ruckelshaus who then demanded Nixon turn over those tapes. Nixon tried to destroy them but knew if he did, he'd go to prison. So let Trump think he holds ALL the cards. 
He is about to make the wrongest possible move by thinking he can defund the Mueller investigation. Americans were prepared for this. 900 protests are about to take place to protect that investigation. If those Americans descend on the WH, what will he do then? Start shooting? 
FacePalm Added Nov 8, 2018 - 12:44pm
To the best of my recollection, Trump's financials were IRS-audited every
If they found anything, there would have been penalties by now.
The 900 Soros-funded antifa "protests"?  It is my sincere hope that they're treated exactly like hippies in '68 Chicago at the first hint of vandalism or assault on their part.  i would just draw the line at using police infiltrators to initiate hostilities(agents provocateur) to "justify" retribution, or seizing one of the demonstrator's cameras, smashing it on the street, then charging them with littering...
But you seem to have abandoned the gun-grabber argument, which is a Good Thing.
Would you say that you're on the side of the Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence?  If so, you should be aware of exactly who it is you're aligning with:
'Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.' 
-Sarah Brady, Chairman of Handgun Control to Senator Howard Metzanbaum
Source: 'The National Educator', January 1994 Page 3
Would you say that you love America as a Constitutional Republic?  Or would you say that you want to change it to a socialist form of governance?
FacePalm Added Nov 8, 2018 - 12:56pm
You're preaching to the choir, brother.
Many years ago, when i first became a sincere disciple of Christ, i was informed that the soul needs to be fed as much or more than the body, and that the true "soul food" is found in the bible (but not there alone).
So i started at the beginning, got to Chronicles, got bored with the "begats," and began to scan through the bible dictionary included with the version i'd been given.  i got to the following phrase: "Daily Ritual."  It said that in the Temple back in Solomon's day, the subset of Levites who were the singers would greet each dawn with 7 particular Psalms.  Now, i don't have any idea which were for what days, but i began that practice, myself, reading the particular song and imagining what i may have sounded like.
Then, it occurred to me that i might wish to ask questions as i read the bible; one of the questions i asked was "Why are there 31 chapters of Proverbs?"  The answer i got was "So you can read one every day of every month - and the short months, just read the extras, it won't hurt."
So i did.
i found the book of Proverbs to be like a garden.  If you go to pick fruit or veg from it in the morning, the mid-morning, around noon, in the afternoon, or evening, you'll find things you missed previously - but all of them good and good for you.
So my habit for several years was to - upon awakening - read the chapter of Proverbs which corresponded to the day of the month.  For example, if i was still following that discipline, today i'd be reading the 8th chapter.  But that's not all the reading i'd do, not by any measure.
Marty Koval Added Nov 8, 2018 - 1:19pm
Face Palm:
You and I are on the same narrow road for eternal life. Like you, I read one Proverbs daily, but I also read five Psalms daily. There are 150 Psalms, so every 30 days I read the book of Psalms. Each year I read the entire Bible. Then go back and read the entire New Testament again. I never get enough of the Word, because like every other human, I was born into sin and have these sinful tendencies. Only reading, studying and putting the Word into action can change our harden and sinful heart.
The only way to grow in Christ is to feed yourself with the Word daily and let the Holy Spirit control you heart, mind and soul.
God Bless.
FacePalm Added Nov 8, 2018 - 1:41pm
i didn't want to be thought of as bragging.
Eventually, my 'upon-awakening' readings expanded to a ch. of the OT, a Psalm, a ch. of Proverbs, a ch. of either the Wisdom of Solomon or the Book of Sirach(the "deuterocanonicals," retained in Catholic Bibles, but curiously omitted from Protestant ones - i'd alternate between those 2 books), then a ch. of the NT.  i found i could read the NT about 3x, almost 4x as often as the OT, which on balance was a Good Thing.  i believe that if one learns as much as is possible to learn about the character, purpose, and commands of Christ, to obey them, one will obtain the discernment to understand which parts of the OT have value, for the Living Word, Christ, will always be superior to the written.  The written is static, unchanging, finite; the Living is mobile, free, infinite.
As for me, i dare not claim i am even on the proper path, much less the road to salvation; for me, Christ said what He meant and meant what He said, so when He prophesies about all the woes coming to those who have accepted Him which will happen just because of their Faith in Him, then concludes by saying "But he who endures to the end will be saved," this does not sound to me like anyone can rest on laurels before they reach "the end," whatever form that may take.
Humility is key.
i don't believe the HS wants to "control" anyone at all; in my experience, one must humble themselves to listen and learn.  At the first sign of resistance, i believe it withdraws until the student(or disciple) is ready again.  God is Love, and so is His Spirit, and so is His Son.  Love doesn't employ force, but persuasion,, save when absolutely necessary to correct behavior which leads to a Bad Place, like driving those who bought and sold from the Temple.
i recently learned that the holy spirit is the look of love that passes between Father and Son.  Makes sense, to me.
Susitna Added Nov 8, 2018 - 6:05pm
To Eleonore: Have you been following the investigation in the last two years? How did you know that this was coming? It doesn't look spontaneous. Who are these people and by whom were they "prepared"?
The truth is Trump could have fired Mueller a long time ago and the second truth is that Mueller has more dirt under the carpet than a storage place! And you know that! 
"He is about to make the wrongest possible move by thinking he can defund the Mueller investigation. Americans were prepared for this. 900 protests are about to take place to protect that investigation. If those Americans descend on the WH, what will he do then? Start shooting? 
Why in heaven do you start talking about violence and what do you mean about "descend on the White House? Who are you? Are you defending Madame President?
But these are just rhetorical questions. Don't even bother to answer. You really sound like Hillary!
FacePalm Added Nov 8, 2018 - 7:23pm
Thanks, Susitna; i meant to address the 900 protests and the theoretical about what Trump would do should those Americans descend on the Whitehouse.
Of course the SS would start shooting.  If the president is in danger, that's their JOB, to protect him by all means necessary.  If an ADS is in place, they might use that, instead of shooting(acronym stands for "Area Denial System"-it fires a microwave beam with a range of 700 yards(7 football fields) that makes anyone hit with it feel like they've just opened a hot stove everywhere on their body.)
Did you hear about the 20-odd "protesters" that showed up at Tucker Carlson's NW DC house last night?  Only his wife was there(his 4 daughters were not, luckily), and she hid in the pantry while she called 911.  They were antifa, and also apparently spraypainted the symbol for anarchism onto his driveway while chanting their nonsense, pounding on the door, and apparently, one left a note pinned to the door, as well.  It'll be interesting to see if he addresses the incident on his show tonight, but i guarantee he'll be doing some serious investing in self-defense equipment, and probably did so TODAY.
i just heard that these 900 protests are actually various chapters of antifa who are being paid by Soros as "beta testers," and that REAL assassins are waiting on the reports before they decide who to target for real. 
Did you notice the MSM hysteria over Session's firing?  They greatly fear his replacement, as he's on-record stating that The Liar should have been arrested and prosecuted long ago, and may well, soon, we'll see.   From another source, i read that Sessions had planned to retire back to Alabama to run for Senator in 2020.
Susitna Added Nov 8, 2018 - 8:01pm
Hi FacePalm: Thanks for getting back with me. As you already know I am leaving this platform. I cannot be around people like Eleonore. 
I read something about Tucker's family but not the terrible details that you are telling me now. I am really scared and very worried about the situation. 
I don't like at all having a dark mind around me, not even if it is digital.  Eleonore brags with violence. I feel like she has an immense hatred and desire to pay back for something. She is almost like Hillary. 
I can pass you my e-mail address via Autumn if you wish. It would be great to keep in touch. I have a lot to tell you. 
God may protect our President.
God bless you and many thanks for sharing your wisdom with me.
Marty Koval Added Nov 8, 2018 - 8:26pm
People who have dark minds have the potential to live out deviant behavior actions and motives by preying on other people. These  people  look to violate and injure others for the sake of doing so. Always be on the defense around these people, because you never know when they will do something evil.
Best thing to do is to avoid people with dark minds completely.
FacePalm Added Nov 8, 2018 - 9:58pm
Autumn has my email, and you're welcome to get in touch if you like.
Christ teaches us to love our enemies, but He didn't say how close we have to be to do so.  *grin*  i agree in a sense with Marty, but everyone needs prayer.  Who knows but your prayer may influence the better angels of another's nature, give them insight, understanding, or even a Visitation which will open dim eyes, enlighten dark hearts, or revive a spirit which made a wrong turning?  That said, it's much easier to pray for an enemy when they're NOT in the process of beating you with a stick...or worse...in my experience.
Love always triumphs eventually.  It just doesn't seem to take effect in much of a hurry...
Susitna Added Nov 9, 2018 - 5:58am
To Marty: I thank you very much for your message.
Your words helped me a lot. I was surrounded by evil people for 1 year. It was a long fight, but I survived. They destroyed themselves at the very end, like in the movies.....
God bless you!
To FacePalm: I will. Thank you as well. I am not planning on skipping your great teaching lessons.....
Eleanore Whitaker Added Nov 9, 2018 - 11:04am
I am notoriously Anti Fascist. If I were not, I would be PRO FASCIST? 
You bet I would protest, resist and fight anyone who DARES try to turn this county into 1939 Nazi Germany. 
Why do I HATE Fascism? Back in 1907, my father was 8 years old and was forced to leave Bari, Italy because of the rise of FASCISM there. 
The eldest sons in families were forced to turn over land and other assets or their oldest male child would be killed.
I am anti fascist now and always will be. Do you want to report me to Pro Fascists? 
Eleanore Whitaker Added Nov 9, 2018 - 11:04am
Susita, women in the US who are not financially dependent don't need a man for support. Do you? 
FacePalm Added Nov 9, 2018 - 11:38am
Perhaps your point could be made more clear by explaining what you mean by fascist or fascism.
My understanding of the word is that government takes majority control of all businesses and corporations in a country, deceives the People thereof by claiming that they only have rights because the State gives them, and that the State is always more important than the individual - and any disagreement or resistance is met with force, usually vandalism/beatings first, followed by imprisonment, torture, slave labor, and eventually, death...or if deemed a sufficient threat to the State, swift execution.
Fascism is collectivism, and differs only slightly, if at all, from the goals and methodologies of socialism, to me.  Maybe you have a different understanding.