QuoteElection, economy spark explosive growth of militias
By Stephanie Schendel, Murrow News Service
The election of President Barack Obama in 2008 triggered an explosion in the number of militias and so-called patriot groups in the United States, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported in its annual tally of such anti-government organizations.
There were 149 militias and patriot groups when Obama took office, compared to more than 1,200 today — an increase of 755 percent, the nonprofit civil rights organization reported.
"The increase has just been astounding," said Mark Potok, editor-in-chief of the SPLC report. "The reality is that many of these groups are becoming more and more fearful that Barack Obama will win the re-election. You can see the anger rising along with that fear."
The SPLC defines the "patriot" movement as made up of conspiracy-minded individuals who see the federal government as their primary enemy. The movement includes paramilitary militias as well as groups of "sovereign citizens," who believe they are not subject to federal or state laws, nor obligated to pay federal taxes, according to SPLC.
The center also reports a steady rise in the number of hate groups in America — from 604 in 2000, to more than 1,000 last year. Those include anti-gay groups, anti-Muslim groups, black separatists and "Christian Identity" groups, which hold racist and anti-Semitic views that overlap with neo-Nazi beliefs.
The spike in these groups can be attributed to a combination of factors, including the sluggish economy, radical propaganda and anxiety over the election of a black president, Potok said.
Potok said although many individuals involved in patriot militias are not criminals, a handful of these groups have been responsible for a significant amount of violence in recent years.
Government employees targeted
SPLC provides one of the few annual reports on militia or anti-government groups. The Federal Bureau of Investigation does not track militia groups unless they are alerted to violent or extremist activity, according to an agency spokesman.
"Some of these groups veer into violent extremism," said Frank Harrill, special agent in charge of the FBI's office in Spokane, Wash., and spokesman for the Inland Northwest Joint Terrorism Task Force. "Where hate and ignorance and violence collide, that is where our interests lie."
Two militia groups have made headlines in recent years for allegedly hatching violent plots to target government employees.
Seven people from the Michigan-based Hutaree Christian militia are on trial for allegedly conspiring to ambush and kill a police officer. They allegedly plotted to follow up the ambush with an attack on the officer's funeral procession in the hope of killing more officers, and thus sparking a revolt against the U.S. government. Recent evidence presented in trial included a recording made by an undercover FBI agent in which the militia's leader, David Stone, 47, says he is going to "start huntin'" police soon. The seven have pleaded innocent, and argue that the "plot" was nothing but talk, protected by the First Amendment.
And in November four members of a Georgia-based militia, all in their 60s and 70s, were charged with plotting to buy explosives and the ingredients to make a deadly toxin to attack government officials. They are in custody awaiting trial.
But members of other militias say that exercising their constitutional right to bear arms does not mean they are committed to revolution.
Spokane-based militia member Ed LeStage, 59, denied that his group, the 63rd Battalion of Lightfoot Militia, which was listed on as an active militia group in the SPLC's report, was a danger — unless, he said, "you're a communist or socialist who attacks us."
LeStage, a veteran to the patriot movement, said he believes the increased number of militias comes from U.S. citizens' desire to restore the country to its constitutional roots. He also said that what he called President Obama's intrusion on personal liberties also has driven growth in the movement.
"He's been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama's been the best gun salesman there ever was."
From his home in eastern Washington, LeStage broadcasts weekly training videos to militia members across the country. Those videos — which include instruction on such things as drinking one's own urine and scavenging for food — are meant to help members survive anarchy or economic collapse.
LeStage said he has been involved in militias and related groups for more than 20 years, including the Idaho Mountain Boys, a member of which was arrested in September 2002 for plotting to kill a federal judge and a police officer.
That member, Larry Raugust, served 77 months for possession and production of pipe bombs. Today, Raugust has a member profile on LeStage's militia website, which has added more than 1,000 members since its launch last fall.
"(Raugust) is just a friend," LeStage said. "He doesn't belong to our unit. He is a convicted felon."
LeStage explained that his militia requires each member to obtain a concealed weapons permit. As a felon, Raugust is not allowed to carry weapons, LeStage said.
The patriot movement first peaked in 1994, said Potok, the author of the SPLC report, in the aftermath of deadly confrontations at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas in 1993, where anti-government groups came under siege by federal authorities.
Membership then dropped sharply during President George W. Bush's two terms before rebounding in late 2008 after the election of Obama, which created a backlash that included "several plots to murder Obama," according to SPLC.
The numbers of those groups have continued to grow, jumping from 824 in 2010 to 1274 this year, the SPLC said.
'Sovereign citizen' movement
The ailing economy also helped fuel a huge expansion in a subset of the larger Patriot movement — the so-called "sovereign citizens" movement. Followers generally believe they do not have to pay federal taxes or follow most laws. The SPLC estimates some 300,000 Americans are involved in the movement.
In September, the FBI issued a bulletin to law enforcement officials that called "sovereign citizens" a growing domestic threat due to some members' belief that they can use armed force to resist police.
The bulletin noted that sovereigns have killed six law officers since 2000. In one of the more deadly clashes, a shootout in West Memphis, Ark., in 2010 left four people dead including two officers. Terry Nichols, convicted as a conspirator in the Oklahoma City bombing, was a sovereign citizen.
In 2010, a shootout with a member of the group in West Memphis, Arkansas ended with four people dead, including two policemen.
Last month, a Texas man who said he was a sovereign citizen was sentenced to 35 years in prison for repeatedly firing at a police officer trying to arrest him.
A Washington state man, David R. Myrland, was sentenced in December to 40 months in prison for threatening to "arrest" the mayor of Kirkland and other local officials "with deadly force."
Investigators said Myrland sent an e-mail to the mayor warning that "50 or more concerned Citizens will enter your home and arrest you. Do not resist, as these Citizens will be heavily armed."
"As sovereign citizens' numbers grow, so do the chances of contact with law enforcement and, thus, the risks that incidents will end in violence," the FBI said at the time.
From LeStage's point of view, though, the risk comes from the top of government.
If Obama is re-elected this year, "we will probably lose our republic," he said. "We will probably turn into another socialist country."
On his website www.modernmilitiamovement.com, some forum members have raised even more dire concerns about the fall's elections.
"Nov. the 8th should be the start of the next civil war," a member with the username "Thunder" wrote in January. "May GOD guide us safely."
If there's any better reason to reelect President Obama than to put the zap on these goofballs' heads, I don't see it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 03:38:10 AM
"He's been after our guns," LeStage said. "Obama's been the best gun salesman there ever was."
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgunsandeyeballs.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F02%2F431339_3404383672620_1360733128_3298735_75689548_n.jpg&hash=058190de6cb14b345d1a148c0740aa43a6b6d246)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 03:39:30 AM
If there's any better reason to reelect President Obama than to put the zap on these goofballs' heads, I don't see it.
I like how a lot of these idiots (like NRA) seem now to believe that for the last 4 years Obama has been laying low so that he can unleash his plan for communist islamic America in the following 4 years.
Quote from: Martinus on March 08, 2012, 03:44:33 AM
I like how a lot of these idiots (like NRA) seem now to believe that for the last 4 years Obama has been laying low so that he can unleash his plan for communist islamic America in the following 4 years.
They've yet to be proved wrong
Quote from: Martinus on March 08, 2012, 03:44:33 AM
I like how a lot of these idiots (like NRA) seem now to believe that for the last 4 years Obama has been laying low so that he can unleash his plan for communist islamic America in the following 4 years.
It is pretty hilarious, since Obama doesn't seem to give two shits about gun control.
How dare Obama go after these upstanding conservative citizens instead of real terrorists! :mad:
Quote from: Gups on March 08, 2012, 04:58:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on March 08, 2012, 03:44:33 AM
I like how a lot of these idiots (like NRA) seem now to believe that for the last 4 years Obama has been laying low so that he can unleash his plan for communist islamic America in the following 4 years.
They've yet to be proved wrong
They were wrong about Clinton. I remember seeing this movie the first time.
Those "sovereign citizen" goofs are a real delight to deal with in court, let me tell you. <_<
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 09:45:45 AM
Those "sovereign citizen" goofs are a real delight to deal with in court, let me tell you. <_<
At least yours are anti-Monarchists, so that's a plus.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:47:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 09:45:45 AM
Those "sovereign citizen" goofs are a real delight to deal with in court, let me tell you. <_<
At least yours are anti-Monarchists, so that's a plus.
Not necessarily. They aren't the least bit consistent in their legal reasonings to be sure, but some of them drag the Queen into all of this, I think claiming that since they are subjects of the Queen that the Canadian government isn't legitimate.
And there is no plus in dealing with sovereigns / free men / de-taxers. :(
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
The hypocrisy and stupidity of the "conservative" right in this country still astounds me. What personal liberties has Obama tried to take away? The right of poors to die of treatable high blood pressure? The whole time they defend the Patriot act and government survailence of its own citizens from the mountain top.
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
But a dollar with the Queen on it is worth more than a dollar with a President on it. :contract:
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
But a dollar with the Queen on it is worth more than a dollar with a President on it. :contract:
I'll be damned. One US dollar is now worth 1.0044 Canadian dollars.
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
But a dollar with the Queen on it is worth more than a dollar with a President on it. :contract:
Do you guys use pound coins, like the Brits? I could get with that. I love the gold dollar, but the GBP coin is heavier and cooler.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:31:17 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
But a dollar with the Queen on it is worth more than a dollar with a President on it. :contract:
Do you guys use pound coins, like the Brits? I could get with that. I love the gold dollar, but the GBP coin is heavier and cooler.
No, though they also have a 2 dollar coin. :x
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
On the fringe perhaps. The rank and file GOPs hate him exactly as much as they hated Clinton.
Quote from: garbon on March 08, 2012, 10:36:32 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:31:17 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
Well, in all honesty, if I were forced to use monopoly money with the Queen on it, I'd go Free Stater, too.
But a dollar with the Queen on it is worth more than a dollar with a President on it. :contract:
Do you guys use pound coins, like the Brits? I could get with that. I love the gold dollar, but the GBP coin is heavier and cooler.
No, though they also have a 2 dollar coin. :x
The loonie and the toonie. :cool:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2F9%2F99%2FLoonie_reverse_view.png%2F220px-Loonie_reverse_view.png&hash=008156880b646d1a2620427d313e23cb8fab1069) (https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fd%2Fd2%2FToonie_-_front.png%2F220px-Toonie_-_front.png&hash=aa2bdcdbaeea6cbb734ff051e7bf4793f85a5202)
Aw, a polar bear. :wub:
Too bad they'll be extinct soon.
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 09:56:57 AM
The hypocrisy and stupidity of the "conservative" right in this country still astounds me. What personal liberties has Obama tried to take away? The right of poors to die of treatable high blood pressure? The whole time they defend the Patriot act and government survailence of its own citizens from the mountain top.
Yeah...nothing that their party has not also tried to take away. And the Obamacare thing might be a real crap sandwich of a bill but it was hardly this revolutionary thing. If you were ok with Bush I have a hard time seeing you having that many problems with Obama.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
You're old enough to remember the Clinton years, right?
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 10:42:55 AM
You're old enough to remember the Clinton years, right?
Well people did claim he was the first black President :P
It's nice that Canada named their money after me.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:40:30 AM
Aw, a polar bear. :wub:
Too bad they'll be extinct soon.
They'll learn to enjoy caribou.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
Seedy is clearly correct, just look how reasonable and accommodating the radical right was with Clinton.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:40:30 AM
Aw, a polar bear. :wub:
Too bad they'll be extinct soon.
Zoos are lovely.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on March 08, 2012, 08:46:00 AM
How dare Obama go after these upstanding conservative citizens instead of real terrorists! :mad:
By "real terrorists," I assume you mean all the people who have ever smoked a doobie? Those are the folks Neil and Seedy consider the threat. People who merely mass-murder seem to be unworthy of their vitriol.
I daresay there are more Neil/Seedy-style goofballs since Obama took office, as well.
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 09:45:45 AM
Those "sovereign citizen" goofs are a real delight to deal with in court, let me tell you. <_<
Yeah, I just got a Statement of Defence that essentially said the Defendant was free and didnt recognize the authority of the Courts.
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 10:42:55 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
You're old enough to remember the Clinton years, right?
The agitation during the Clinton years is nothing compared to now, and you know it.
There's a big difference between being pissed off that a Democratic centrist steals a couple of your ideas versus everything from challenging the legitimacy of the President's birth, to showing up at campaign rallies with guns, to calling the President a liar during a Presidential Address to the United States Congress, to "feeling threatened" on an airport tarmac.
So don't gimme that shit. You fucking know better. It's different when there's a nigger involved.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 10:42:55 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
You're old enough to remember the Clinton years, right?
The agitation during the Clinton years is nothing compared to now, and you know it.
There's a big difference between being pissed off that a Democratic centrist steals a couple of your ideas versus everything from challenging the legitimacy of the President's birth, to showing up at campaign rallies with guns, to calling the President a liar during a Presidential Address to the United States Congress, to "feeling threatened" on an airport tarmac.
So don't gimme that shit. You fucking know better. It's different when there's a nigger involved.
Yet it was Clinton who was impeached, not Obama...
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
There's a big difference between being pissed off that a Democratic centrist steals a couple of your ideas versus everything from challenging the legitimacy of the President's birth, to showing up at campaign rallies with guns, to calling the President a liar during a Presidential Address to the United States Congress, to "feeling threatened" on an airport tarmac.
You either have a selective memory, or just didn't pay much attention to the extreme right during the Clinton years. Remember the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994? That ignited much more of a reaction than what we're seeing with Obama.
QuoteSo don't gimme that shit. You fucking know better. It's different when there's a nigger involved.
You planted this notion in your head even before Obama became president. It simply doesn't exist, except for on the fringe of the fringe. For you I'm guessing it's your own weird conflicted views on race causing you to act out-- or something.
Quote from: Barrister on March 08, 2012, 11:15:44 AM
Yet it was Clinton who was impeached, not Obama...
I guess I fail to see what that has to do with extreme right militias. How many House Reps do they have?
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:19:47 AM
You planted this notion in your head even before Obama became president. It simply doesn't exist, except for on the fringe of the fringe. For you I'm guessing it's your own weird conflicted views on race causing you to act out-- or something.
Isn't that who we are talking about here? The fringe of the fringe?
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:27:33 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:19:47 AM
You planted this notion in your head even before Obama became president. It simply doesn't exist, except for on the fringe of the fringe. For you I'm guessing it's your own weird conflicted views on race causing you to act out-- or something.
Isn't that who we are talking about here? The fringe of the fringe?
Dunno. I'm just saying the reaction to Clinton as an anti-gun president was stronger than the reaction to Obama as an anti-gun president.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 10:42:55 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
You're old enough to remember the Clinton years, right?
The agitation during the Clinton years is nothing compared to now, and you know it.
There's a big difference between being pissed off that a Democratic centrist steals a couple of your ideas versus everything from challenging the legitimacy of the President's birth, to showing up at campaign rallies with guns, to calling the President a liar during a Presidential Address to the United States Congress, to "feeling threatened" on an airport tarmac.
So don't gimme that shit. You fucking know better. It's different when there's a nigger involved.
I think the person who most feels it is different with a nigger involved appear to be you.
Why is that?
Quote from: Berkut on March 08, 2012, 11:32:10 AM
I think the person who most feels it is different with a nigger involved appear to be you.
Why is that?
I just call a cracker duck a cracker duck, Whitey. At least I'm not deluding myself with your suburban "oh-it's-got-nothing-to-do-with-being-black" whitey-denial, like you and your boy derfetus. Bet some of your best friends are black.
And regarding impeachment: at least that was done under the rule of law, not shouting him down on the floor of the Congress for the first time since the 19th century. Surprised the President hasn't been assaulted with a walking cane yet.
And Gingrich himself at least had the courtesy to refer to Clinton as the President, or President Clinton; something he refuses to do with President Obama as a candidate. It's just "Obama". Why is that?
What makes this President different than all the other past Defeatocrats? Hmmmmm.....
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:27:33 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:19:47 AM
You planted this notion in your head even before Obama became president. It simply doesn't exist, except for on the fringe of the fringe. For you I'm guessing it's your own weird conflicted views on race causing you to act out-- or something.,
Isn't that who we are talking about here? The fringe of the fringe?
Dunno. I'm just saying the reaction to Clinton as an anti-gun president was stronger than the reaction to Obama as an anti-gun president.
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 11:51:44 AM
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
Absolutely nothing. Which makes him an even more sinister threat.
QuoteIn public, [President Obama will] remind us that he's put off calls from his party to renew the old Clinton [assault weapons] gun ban, he hasn't pushed for new gun control laws, and he'll even say he looked the other way when Congress passed a couple of minor pro-gun bills by huge majorities. The president will offer the Second Amendment lip service and hit the campaign trail saying he's actually been good for the Second Amendment.
But it's a big fat stinking lie, just like all the other lies that have come out of this corrupt administration. It's all part -- it's all part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment in our country. [...]
Before the President was even sworn into office, they met and they hatched a conspiracy of public deception to try to guarantee his re-election in 2012. [...]
And Obama himself is no fool. So when he got elected, they concocted a scheme to stay away from the gun issue, lull gun owners to sleep, and play us for fools in 2012. Well, gun owners are not fools, and we are not fooled. We see the president's strategy crystal clear: get re-elected, and with no other re-elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms freedom. Erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and exorcise it from the U.S. Constitution. That's their agenda.
--Wayne LaPierre, NRA, September 26, 2011
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
to showing up at campaign rallies with guns,
Wasn't it a black guy that did that...
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 11:54:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
to showing up at campaign rallies with guns,
Wasn't it a black guy that did that...
Once. An obvious plant. I think it was Clarence Thomas on his day off, too.
I am intrigued that after a President wins a second term his party no longer has to worry about elections ever again and has dictatorial powers.
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 11:51:44 AM
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
His "bitter clingers" comment got everything stirred up prior to him taking office. A lot of people are still bracing for "what is to come" which has driven up ammo prices something fierce <_< . But since he chose to expend his political capital on Obamacare and some other legislation, he hasn't really done a whole lot about guns.
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 12:02:33 PM
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Don't get me started. With all the research I've been doing for my AR15 build, I swear I've run into people who take the zombie thing seriously.
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:59:19 AM
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 11:51:44 AM
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
His "bitter clingers" comment got everything stirred up prior to him taking office. A lot of people are still bracing for "what is to come" which has driven up ammo prices something fierce <_< . But since he chose to expend his political capital on Obamacare and some other legislation, he hasn't really done a whole lot about guns.
Not a whole lot, or nothing?
What do I have to do with this? :huh: I love the blacks. :)
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:59:19 AM
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 11:51:44 AM
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
His "bitter clingers" comment got everything stirred up prior to him taking office. A lot of people are still bracing for "what is to come" which has driven up ammo prices something fierce <_< . But since he chose to expend his political capital on Obamacare and some other legislation, he hasn't really done a whole lot about guns.
Not a whole lot, or nothing?
From what I hear, firearms & ammunition importation has been a touch more restricted since Obama took office. So not a whole lot.
Of course there's the "Fast and Furious" fiasco, but that doesn't directly relate.
Quote from: Caliga on March 08, 2012, 12:24:34 PM
What do I have to do with this? :huh: I love the blacks. :)
I saw guns, and I thought of you. :hug:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flonelymachines.org%2Fimages%2Ftechnical_difficulties.gif&hash=3836692800d54f6245e5d75fea9e2f7063784c8e)
:lmfao:
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:59:19 AM
A lot of people are still bracing for "what is to come" which has driven up ammo prices something fierce <_< .
I must admit it that I love it when stupidity is self-punishing. I am willing to bet the morons are still buying for stockpiling even with prices this high.
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 12:31:01 PM
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 12:11:08 PM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 11:59:19 AM
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 11:51:44 AM
What has Obama done to get any reaction as an anti-gun president?
His "bitter clingers" comment got everything stirred up prior to him taking office. A lot of people are still bracing for "what is to come" which has driven up ammo prices something fierce <_< . But since he chose to expend his political capital on Obamacare and some other legislation, he hasn't really done a whole lot about guns.
Not a whole lot, or nothing?
From what I hear, firearms & ammunition importation has been a touch more restricted since Obama took office. So not a whole lot.
Of course there's the "Fast and Furious" fiasco, but that doesn't directly relate.
This is a topic I don't have much interest in so my questions are at least partly serious.
What was the "fast & furious" fiasco?
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
What was the "fast & furious" fiasco?
:secret:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/atf-fast-furious-sg,0,3828090.storygallery (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/atf-fast-furious-sg,0,3828090.storygallery)
Quote from: grumbler on March 08, 2012, 12:50:29 PM
I must admit it that I love it when stupidity is self-punishing. I am willing to bet the morons are still buying for stockpiling even with prices this high.
Oh, it compounds itself for sure. Plus this is an election year. For the calibers I use, ammo is two to four times more expensive now than it was 10 years ago.
Good time to try my hand at loading my own, methinks.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 12:31:41 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flonelymachines.org%2Fimages%2Ftechnical_difficulties.gif&hash=3836692800d54f6245e5d75fea9e2f7063784c8e)
That is the best thing I have seen all week.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 11:10:48 AM
The agitation during the Clinton years is nothing compared to now, and you know it.
There's a big difference between being pissed off that a Democratic centrist steals a couple of your ideas versus everything from challenging the legitimacy of the President's birth, to showing up at campaign rallies with guns, to calling the President a liar during a Presidential Address to the United States Congress, to "feeling threatened" on an airport tarmac.
So don't gimme that shit. You fucking know better. It's different when there's a nigger involved.
Well they haven't successfully managed to launch a major terrorist attack. At least not yet. Though there have been some attempts. Good paranoid quote from the NRA guy though. They are really beyond the pale and their screwiness aren't they?
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
This is a topic I don't have much interest in so my questions are at least partly serious.
What was the "fast & furious" fiasco?
Attempt to stop gun running to Mexico that went array. Conservatives went apeshit at the idea that guns are smuggled from the US to Mexico and that the Feds might try to stop it. Obviously it's part of that conspiracy that the NRA guy was talking about.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 08, 2012, 04:29:58 PM
Quote from: sbr on March 08, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
This is a topic I don't have much interest in so my questions are at least partly serious.
What was the "fast & furious" fiasco?
Attempt to stop gun running to Mexico that went array. Conservatives went apeshit at the idea that guns are smuggled from the US to Mexico and that the Feds might try to stop it. Obviously it's part of that conspiracy that the NRA guy was talking about.
Try again.
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 12:02:33 PM
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Don't get me started. With all the research I've been doing for my AR15 build, I swear I've run into people who take the zombie thing seriously.
And these people are allowed to buy semi-automatic assault rifles ?
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 12:02:33 PM
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Don't get me started. With all the research I've been doing for my AR15 build, I swear I've run into people who take the zombie thing seriously.
Zombie zombies or using that term for the horde of unprepared survivors that will wander the post-apocalyptic wasteland? Preppers like to use the second version of that word.
Oh, what part is wrong? It didn't go array?
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 12:02:33 PM
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Don't get me started. With all the research I've been doing for my AR15 build, I swear I've run into people who take the zombie thing seriously.
Elaborate
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
Anything started by blacks and Jews can't possibly be credible.
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
And of course busting white racists. Is that hurting your bottom line?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 08, 2012, 10:23:54 PM
Quote from: derspiess on March 08, 2012, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 08, 2012, 12:02:33 PM
Don't blame Obama for the rising ammo prices, it's not like he's the guy in the lab developing the zombie virus...
Don't get me started. With all the research I've been doing for my AR15 build, I swear I've run into people who take the zombie thing seriously.
Elaborate
Not much I can elaborate on. And by "run into", I mean online. Guys spec out their AR builds & ask for advice, citing zombie killing as one of the potential uses. And there's been a proliferation of zombie-themed shooting stuff, initially targets & now parts/gear, even special ammo loads. Prepare to be scared or amused: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_158/817807_Official_Zombie_Weapon_Pic_Thread.html
Maybe it's all a joke (I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the general fascination with zombies) or maybe Ed is right and "zombie" is code for unprepped apocalypse survivors (which is its own set of issues) but I swear some people are taking it seriously.
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
I am intrigued that after a President wins a second term his party no longer has to worry about elections ever again and has dictatorial powers.
It's such nonsense. I saw a line by some historian that was interesting that all great Presidents win a second term, yet no President's second term goes well.
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 09, 2012, 12:26:14 PM
It's such nonsense. I saw a line by some historian that was interesting that all great Presidents win a second term, yet no President's second term goes well.
I know. If anything not being able to even threaten to run for a third term makes a President all but politically impotent in his last couple years of his second term, far from being able to unleash his secret agenda.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 08, 2012, 05:40:23 PM
Oh, what part is wrong? It didn't go array?
The outrage is because it was the US government doing the smuggling, and the guns smuggled by them ended up being used later to kill US officers.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2012, 01:19:36 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 08, 2012, 05:40:23 PM
Oh, what part is wrong? It didn't go array?
The outrage is because it was the US government doing the smuggling, and the guns smuggled by them ended up being used later to kill US officers.
Yes, it went array. The US government has done other sting operations that failed. With drugs and such.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 09, 2012, 06:03:43 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2012, 01:19:36 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 08, 2012, 05:40:23 PM
Oh, what part is wrong? It didn't go array?
The outrage is because it was the US government doing the smuggling, and the guns smuggled by them ended up being used later to kill US officers.
Yes, it went array. The US government has done other sting operations that failed. With drugs and such.
"Went awry". An "array" is a systematic arrangement of objects, usually in rows and columns ...
Dammit all.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 09, 2012, 06:16:30 PM
Dammit all.
I thought it was some sort of meme thing I was missing. Didn't even consider it was you being stupid. :P
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Eh, no. Not these days.
Quote from: derspiess on March 09, 2012, 07:00:07 PM
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Eh, no. Not these days.
Yeah, it is, derfuhrer.
Quote from: derspiess on March 09, 2012, 07:00:07 PM
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Eh, no. Not these days.
Nothing destroys credibility in the eyes of GOPtard more then fighting racists.
Quote from: derspiess on March 09, 2012, 07:00:07 PMEh, no. Not these days.
What is your number one example that shows how little credibility the SLPC has?
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
To be fair, these days Baghdad Bob has more credibility than Hansie.
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Nah, Hans is:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_jNFMBZMTBvA%2FSZZFewCvuCI%2FAAAAAAAAAgU%2F4YShF7SBCJQ%2Fs400%2Fcredible%2Bhulk.jpg&hash=3e683f2a1e765a84219762764f29ae09f462244a)
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 09, 2012, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
I am intrigued that after a President wins a second term his party no longer has to worry about elections ever again and has dictatorial powers.
It's such nonsense. I saw a line by some historian that was interesting that all great Presidents win a second term, yet no President's second term goes well.
What went wrong in Eisenhower's second term?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 10, 2012, 01:38:19 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 09, 2012, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
I am intrigued that after a President wins a second term his party no longer has to worry about elections ever again and has dictatorial powers.
It's such nonsense. I saw a line by some historian that was interesting that all great Presidents win a second term, yet no President's second term goes well.
What went wrong in Eisenhower's second term?
His heart muscle, for one.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 10, 2012, 01:38:19 AMWhat went wrong in Eisenhower's second term?
I'm not sure. It was just a line I read. I think the point is that most Presidents achieve most of their legacy in the first term, the second term is just a way of confirming it and setting their version of history in place.
But, off the top of my head, isn't that when Khruschev makes arms deals with Nasser and containment in the Middle East is broken, lost Cuba and weren't the late 50s really bad in terms of civil rights beginning to ratchet up? Also what did he achieve in his second term?
The interesting counter-example in my view is W.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 10, 2012, 01:38:19 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 09, 2012, 12:26:14 PM
Quote from: Valmy on March 08, 2012, 11:58:41 AM
I am intrigued that after a President wins a second term his party no longer has to worry about elections ever again and has dictatorial powers.
It's such nonsense. I saw a line by some historian that was interesting that all great Presidents win a second term, yet no President's second term goes well.
What went wrong in Eisenhower's second term?
That U2 thing didn't go so well. I think Ike really wanted to diffuse the cold war. The U2 thing hurt that, though it may have been impossible. Soviet leadership made it very difficult. I think Khrushchev actually would have liked to diffuse the cold war as well, but he was a bumbler, and didn't think ahead. His first instinct was to score points and make short term gains even if it meant compromising long term strategies. Khrushchev might have returned Gary Powers without embarrassing the US for some kind of deal. Hell, he could have let him go as a sign of good faith. Such a gesture might have impressed the Americans, and opened the door to better relations.
Quote from: Jacob on March 09, 2012, 06:39:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on March 09, 2012, 02:41:05 AM
The Southern Poverty Law Center isn't exactly a credible organization, famous for creating bogus reports in order to stimulate donations.
It's more credible than you, Hansie.
Well, it's not exactly cut and dried. They do good work representing folks in court, but it's not like they're uniquely equipped to do so. That said, I feel that some of their rhetoric is a bit overblown, and they're definitely something of a fundraising machine these days. Still, at least they're of some actual benefit, rather than a shakedown machine like Sharpton and Jackson. Still, it must be hard for them to know that their best days are behind them. Where they once were slaying the Klan, now they're just whacking methheads.
Besides, you know how I feel about activists.
I think whacking methheads is a very noble pursuit. Anyway, some needs to keep an eye on the Militias and tax protesters. They're dangerous.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 10, 2012, 10:34:09 AM
I think whacking methheads is a very noble pursuit. Anyway, some needs to keep an eye on the Militias and tax protesters. They're dangerous.
I'll whack 'em off.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
I think is the opposite. All Obama have going for him is that he is black.
If he had been white he wouldn't be sitting on the White House.
We would have another Clinton, since we all know McCain can't win presidential elections.
Quote from: Siege on March 11, 2012, 12:11:05 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 08, 2012, 10:03:25 AM
It's only because he's black. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.
ZOMG IT WULD BE TEH SAME WITH A WHITE DUDE
No, no it wouldn't. And you all know it.
I think is the opposite. All Obama have going for him is that he is black.
If he had been white he wouldn't be sitting on the White House.
We would have another Clinton, since we all know McCain can't win presidential elections.
You really don't pay attention, do you?