Feds and Militias stand off over cattle seizures.

[The2ndAmendment]

Which march? There were 3 marches, with two of them being stopped.

The first one was stopped when police attacked the marchers with clubs and tear gas. So obviously the Deacons for Defense didn't help there.

...

You're rewriting history again, or at the in case, revising it by omission and arguing from a stealthy false premise.

Did KKK and KKK affiliated police ever open fire (gunfire) upon any of the marches? Should the Deacons of Defense and Justice have opened fire on the white uniformed thugs using fire-hoses?

ABSOLUTELY YES!

Are you truly claiming that the Deacons should have shot the LEO scum for using firehoses?

Unquestionably.

The KKK opened fired on the marches?

Yes KKK and KKK-like groups often killed blacks behind the scenes and undoubtedly played apart in the assassination of MLK, but I know of no instances where they publicly opened fire on blacks while they marched on the streets at rallies.

Had the black militas opened fire upon the scum in uniform using fire-hoses, they would have had sufficient cause and support from whites to massacre the black population. It would have been genocide. You cannot shoot the Government unless they shoot first, the confiscation of firearms being the only exception, since you cannot shoot the Government back if they shoot you if they take your firearms.

 

[WinterBorn]

Which march? There were 3 marches, with two of them being stopped.

The first one was stopped when police attacked the marchers with clubs and tear gas. So obviously the Deacons for Defense didn't help there.

...

You're rewriting history again, or at the in case, revising it by omission and arguing from a stealthy false premise.

Did KKK and KKK affiliated police ever open fire (gunfire) upon any of the marches? Should the Deacons of Defense and Justice have opened fire on the white uniformed thugs using fire-hoses?

Are you truly claiming that the Deacons should have shot the LEO scum for using firehoses?

The omission: LEO's never used firearms against the marches.
The shadow false premise: That the Deacons would have been morally justified in shooting the thug LEO's for the suppression tactics that they used.

Seeing how clever you worded your response, you are, without a doubt, a Progressive think-tank propaganda artist. You've met your match on these forums, I'm the heaviest hitter here.

Let me help you clarify. I asked if you were amused by my comment of my family being involved in the Selma March. You reply with stuff about the Deacons.

In the video you posted, the Deacons were hired in 1966 as security for marches. The Selma marches (all 3) happened in 1965.

So what was your point in bringing them up again?

Oh, and as for the LEOs never using firearms against the marchers, you might want to do a little more research. One young man died at the first march. Big fuss about it in some circles. Maybe you should find out why they called it Bloody Sunday? It was not just for the beatings.

You know, you have accused me of rewriting history. Apparently you should study more of it.

 

[WinterBorn]

...

You're rewriting history again, or at the in case, revising it by omission and arguing from a stealthy false premise.

Did KKK and KKK affiliated police ever open fire (gunfire) upon any of the marches? Should the Deacons of Defense and Justice have opened fire on the white uniformed thugs using fire-hoses?

ABSOLUTELY YES!

Are you truly claiming that the Deacons should have shot the LEO scum for using firehoses?

Unquestionably.

The KKK opened fired on the marches?

Yes KKK and KKK-like groups often killed blacks behind the scenes and undoubtedly played apart in the assassination of MLK, but I know of no instances where they publicly opened fire on blacks while they marched on the streets at rallies.

Had the black militas opened fire upon the scum in uniform using fire-hoses, they would have had sufficient cause and support from whites to massacre the black population. It would have been genocide. You cannot shoot the Government unless they shoot first, the confiscation of firearms being the only exception, since you cannot shoot the Government back if they shoot you if they take your firearms.

And had the militia opened fire and killed any federal agents in Nevada, a shit storm would have blown in and the result would have been much like you describe for the blacks.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

And had the militia opened fire and killed any federal agents in Nevada, a shit storm would have blown in and the result would have been much like you describe for the blacks.

No, because KKK Democrats have perpetually kept blacks disarmed since the 1600's to this very day, so that they'll never have the "critical mass" of armed blacks citizens to resist tyranny.

Fortunately, whites have not ever experienced disarmament in the United States, unlike the whites in the UK and Australia and other socialist shitholes.

 

[The T]

And had the militia opened fire and killed any federal agents in Nevada, a shit storm would have blown in and the result would have been much like you describe for the blacks.

No, because KKK Democrats have perpetually kept blacks disarmed since the 1600's to this very day, so that they'll never have the "critical mass" of armed blacks citizens to resist tyranny.

Fortunately, whites have not ever experienced disarmament in the United States, unlike the whites in the UK and Australia and other socialist shitholes.

And this government will rue the day they attempt it. Like this...

Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder Pushes to Track American Gun Owners


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E3bnUGkua8&feature=player_embedded#t=0"]Eric Holder on Gun Safety - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because conservatives, Dems and Pubs, have poorly treated minorities from the 1600s until today. Don't worry, 2dA, no one is mad at you.

 

[Gadawg73]

...

You're rewriting history again, or at the in case, revising it by omission and arguing from a stealthy false premise.

Did KKK and KKK affiliated police ever open fire (gunfire) upon any of the marches? Should the Deacons of Defense and Justice have opened fire on the white uniformed thugs using fire-hoses?

ABSOLUTELY YES!

Are you truly claiming that the Deacons should have shot the LEO scum for using firehoses?

Unquestionably.

The KKK opened fired on the marches?

Yes KKK and KKK-like groups often killed blacks behind the scenes and undoubtedly played apart in the assassination of MLK, but I know of no instances where they publicly opened fire on blacks while they marched on the streets at rallies.

Had the black militas opened fire upon the scum in uniform using fire-hoses, they would have had sufficient cause and support from whites to massacre the black population. It would have been genocide. You cannot shoot the Government unless they shoot first, the confiscation of firearms being the only exception, since you cannot shoot the Government back if they shoot you if they take your firearms.

KKK bombed churches killing little black kids, murdered protesters and buried them.
A "heavy hitter" ought to know at least something.

 

[Iceweasel]

Because conservatives, Dems and Pubs, have poorly treated minorities from the 1600s until today. Don't worry, 2dA, no one is mad at you.

Which explains why they have been moving here in droves since day one. Good thinking.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Final comment: from day one, America has been the lodestone for all races, peoples, colors, in the Earth. We are all descended from immigrants, even our Native Americans (no, you were not the First People here). Anybody in his right mind would want to be here.

 

[regent]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

 

[Iceweasel]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

 

[regent]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

 

[Katzndogz]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

The courts are corrupt. There is little to no separation of powers.

 

[Iceweasel]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

Maybe. But not the way it was handled. They obviously did not predict that some people are getting fed up with the federal government's heavy handed bullshit.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why can't the courts solve the problem? We pay all that money to maintain our system of laws and yet we seem unable or unwilling to let the law and the courts solve this problem. Perhaps one side for some reason is unwilling to allow this problem before the courts and if so why?

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

So far I've read the fed have rounded up 380 head of cattle. My guess is they will let the nutters calm down a bit and then go in and round up the rest in a month or two.

 

[regent]

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

Maybe. But not the way it was handled. They obviously did not predict that some people are getting fed up with the federal government's heavy handed bullshit.

It seems some people are always against some laws or the way government enforces the law, but that's normal for some laws, the question is should the government enforce only laws some people are not fed up with?

 

[regent]

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

So far I've read the fed have rounded up 380 head of cattle. My guess is they will let the nutters calm down a bit and then go in and round up the rest in a month or two.

That has been their method in recent years. Early in our history the government just went in and enforced the law. America's first encounter with people that wouldn't obey the law was the Whiskey Rebellion, George Washington raised an army and they went and dispersed the lawbreakers and sent some to prison. Today the government uses more gentle tactics but still people can be killed and hurt. In fact, didn't the Republicans have a campaign plank in the Goldwater election: Law and Order?

 

[Gadawg73]

Because conservatives, Dems and Pubs, have poorly treated minorities from the 1600s until today. Don't worry, 2dA, no one is mad at you.

Which explains why they have been moving here in droves since day one. Good thinking.

Right, African Americans willingly moved here.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

KKK bombed churches killing little black kids, murdered protesters and buried them.
A "heavy hitter" ought to know at least something.

Yes, that is well known, but that's not during the marches themselves. They couldn't attack the marches (with guns/explosives) because the marches had armed black militias protecting them. The black militias showed extraordinary discipline and virtue by not using their firearms against the LEO scum wielding firehoses and other violent suppressive tactics.

It's in every American's best internet to study the black marches and the the behavior/protocol of the black militias during this time.

 

[Gadawg73]

The courts did deal with it. Enforcement is a different matter.

So should the law be enforced?

So far I've read the fed have rounded up 380 head of cattle. My guess is they will let the nutters calm down a bit and then go in and round up the rest in a month or two.

Sniper teams and 200 agents to round up cattle in a civil matter.
Wow, even Obama knew this was bad decision.