And This is How Civil Wars Begin....

[turnburglar]

I agree completely on the asshatedness of most militia groups. While I think its completely acceptable for a community to have a militia for the preservation and defense of said community.... We pay taxes. A lot of taxes. Thats what sheriff, national guard, and LEO/EMS services are for. If you dont think those entities are enough to protect your community, then get more involvded in local politics and push for change you would like to see. America has been at war with the DNC for longer than a decade now, and while it may be fun to role play Army Ranger with your neighbor and do bounding drills, the reality of this whole mess is that you will probably not need said skill set.


A staggering amount of damage can be done with creative minds and a laptop in the information addicted/post Truth world we live in. The fake antifa profiles are a good example and starting point. What I am advocating is nothing new and the cyber group 'Anonymous' is a perfect example. Just to be clear I am in no way affiliated with Anon, but I did watch a really good netflix doc on them awhile back and thought: "these guys might really be onto something". While some of the things they do are technically 'illegal' in the sense of the term, I dont personally consider cyber attacks to be immoral or unethical. Of course hack antifa/DNC/soros at your own risk.

[Jellybean]

That was basically my point. The "blessing" comment was a bit sarcastic (adjust your meter). However, there may come a point where they say "Jeez, GTFO already! Good riddance!" I don't want to see it happen, but I'd rather it go down that way than live under Socialists/Communists who want to micro-manage every aspect of your life. Guns are an impediment to their taking over that total control of society. That is why guns really stick in their craw.

Yeah, it's kinda hard to read sarcasm on the internet...
I think we're on the same page here though.

I was referring to voting. It's pretty much 50/50 Right/Left. In other words the way people vote. You'd need a remotely viable third candidate to prove my point, so go back to Bush I vs Clinton with Perot in the mix. Perot garnered 19% of the vote. That's pretty close to the 20% figure I threw out there. My point being that the ~ 20% whose vote is up for grabs each election exists.

Perfect example is the mid-terms. Historically the party that holds the Oval Office loses one or both houses of Congress. Why? Just two short years earlier those same voters had given them control of not only the Presidency but all of Congress (this applies to both Obama and Trump). That right there tells me how fickle that "middle" is, 'cause the R's voted R and the D's voted D. The "mushy middle" doesn't know what they want from one election to the next and are very apt to go with the prevailing winds.

Indeed, I'd say that's pretty much the truth.

I would actually theorize a mild opposite percentage- I think the hardcore adherents to either side have shrunk slightly, and the wishy washy middle has grown, as people, tired of endlessly hashing out their views or being attacked for them, adopt the easy "come together" position that allows them to be BOTH safely neutral from both sides, and also for or against whichever side they need to be for/against at the time.

But then again... who really knows...

I guess I have a couple of questions:

1) What do you mean by fight back? I ask that because I think folks are fighting back. Maybe not to the extremes that you wish, but folks are fighting back.

2) What do you mean by unconventional means? Assassination? Defamation? Boycott? Insurrection?

3) What would you do if folks said NOW? Are you going to war because someone said it was time?

I guess each person will have their own tipping point and their own ideas of what actions are appropriate. I'm sure that there are many who feel they are already active in their own way.

There are probably more constructive ways than posting on the internet.

These are the valid questions everyone should ask, not just of themselves, but every time they're with someone that wants to talk shit about "what they're gonna do once the Revolution 2.0 kicks off"....
At the same time, it does seem to me that many have to "gentlemanly" a view of things, and this colors their perception of what is and is not permissible...

[RetroRevolver77]

delete

[ABNAK]

I get what you're saying, I think, and I'm inclined to believe we have different ideas about what "center" is. I agree that most folks voted aren't "up for grabs," but just because a voter has a predisposition doesn't mean they necessarily are left or right leaning, in an extreme sense.

That is what we would need to define.

The following views I hold aren't "extreme" (from earlier in this thread): "I don't consider being pro-RKBA, anti-illegal immigration, strong on defense, low taxes, limited government, et al to be an "extreme". If any of those is a "radical" or "extremist" view then there is a total disconnect from reality for the person thinking they are.

Then again I'm against random police checkpoints (DUI, "registration" checks, etc.), don't give a damn if they legalize weed or not, don't care what sex you sleep with but don't want it shoved in my face, am against domestic government surveillance, etc. Maybe that puts me in the "middle", but somehow I don't think so. The views I expressed in the paragraph above are the crux of it all, with the stuff I just wrote being "fine tuning". The previously listed RKBA, anti-illegals, and limited government would likely keep me out of the "middle" by today's f****d up definitions.

[ABNAK]

I changed my post to 'someone.'

We're good! Thanks for the clarification.

[Tx_Aggie]

Unconventional means are absolutley paramount in an unconventional civil war.

To start, I am not advocating violent measures. However there are certain 'unlawful' things that a person or group could carry out without ever hurting a single person. Seeing as the enemy controls the media and its narative; 'tit for tat' would never be a proper solution to the problem. Instead a better solution would be to attack your enemies weapons.

Think DDOS attacks, misinformation, signal jamming and other various forms of electronic warfare. A truly effective patriotic group would much more closely resemble a psyops unit than a SEAL team.


If you really want to "get in the shit" go get yourself a VPN, some redbull, and get to work.

I agree completely on the asshatedness of most militia groups. While I think its completely acceptable for a community to have a militia for the preservation and defense of said community.... We pay taxes. A lot of taxes. Thats what sheriff, national guard, and LEO/EMS services are for. If you dont think those entities are enough to protect your community, then get more involvded in local politics and push for change you would like to see. America has been at war with the DNC for longer than a decade now, and while it may be fun to role play Army Ranger with your neighbor and do bounding drills, the reality of this whole mess is that you will probably not need said skill set.


A staggering amount of damage can be done with creative minds and a laptop in the information addicted/post Truth world we live in. The fake antifa profiles are a good example and starting point. What I am advocating is nothing new and the cyber group 'Anonymous' is a perfect example. Just to be clear I am in no way affiliated with Anon, but I did watch a really good netflix doc on them awhile back and thought: "these guys might really be onto something". While some of the things they do are technically 'illegal' in the sense of the term, I dont personally consider cyber attacks to be immoral or unethical. Of course hack antifa/DNC/soros at your own risk.

I think you make some great points (especially the bolded portions), and have been thinking something similar for a while now.

[Honu]

I think you make some great points (especially the bolded portions), and have been thinking something similar for a while now.

look at what identity theft does to people ! that alone IMHO shows how powerful that bolded side of things can go with digital style of things

this of course is when things are like they are in normal mode and if things go south wont matter

but the idea of things going south not sure who or how may saw the fall of the soviet union the way it happened and so quick and when we look at where it is now today is it better or worse then it was or how does one view it from a outside perspective vs inside perspective would that change and of course vs age etc..

[turnburglar]

Reality says you're wrong, none of the police are able to contain riots nor stop violent protesters from harming people. You aren't paying attention to what's actually happening around the country.

I have worked more than 1 riot, and have spent time carrying a gun for a living which included REAL intel briefings, not the cultivation/hypodermic needle you get from CNN. Sorry to tell you, but the real fight isnt in the streets and its not gonna be won with guns.


Yea protect your family with the gold dots if a violent mob really comes to your door step, but to say that portland, ferguson and SC are representative of the whole country is a gross misrepresentation of 'reality'. I live in a 'resist' city at the moment and can say its busniess as usual with a different set of bumperstickers.

[Honu]

Reality says you're wrong, none of the police are able to contain riots nor stop violent protesters from harming people. You aren't paying attention to what's actually happening around the country.

I think they can
BUT the top are more about politics and becoming political leaders do not want to and they give the orders to stand down or not stop things etc..

many are lefties themselves (the higher ups)
I do think many officers being hired today are also not what we used to have so the high ups do have some they can use when needed

sadly its a mess

[RetroRevolver77]

delete