72 Hours Before Rally: 'We Are Being Set Up' in VA

[Baconqueen13]

Who left the gate to angry town open?

Not sure but you might want to shut it. It seems to be all those from your "camp" that are up in arms because Virginia VOTED with a majority of voters to impose regulations on the sale of guns in their state. Guess they should have voted instead of just yelling about it online.

[Carpy]

You didn't have a problem with it when Trump won the presidential election over Hilary despite her having the popular vote. (Aka more individuals voting for her). That's because the electoral college took over. You only disagree with it when it's your side losing whatever the vote was and sorry but that's just not the way things work. I get that city life is different than small town life and what's ideal for one is not ideal for the other, but our voting system designed to reflect the voice of the people ALL the people, not just the country bumpkins, and not just the spoiled city slickers. Someone is ALWAYS going to disagree with the result and voice their disdain, especially when things don't go the way they want it to

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

Constitutional rights are not subject to the will of the people, which is my point that seems to escape many.

[WellPreserved]

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

Constitutional rights are not subject to the will of the people, which is my point that seems to escape many.

True. But the judiciary has the sole authority to declare laws made by Congress or states unconstitutional, not minority special interest groups.

[Carpy]

Ah yes, the old red herring argument. I'm not even going to bother addressing your knee jerk reaction as it accomplishes nothing as that scenario would never happen and it's just you crying

Of course you won't. It's a constitutionally sound comparison.

No, it really isn't. I know you THINK it is because freedom of religion and right to bear arms are both part of the constitution but they aren't as they are worded differently and cover different objectives.

I happen to support the second amendment but you wouldn't believe it because you've got that "If you're not with me you're against me mentality" that relies on knee jerk reactions and a pissing match to see who shouts the loudest. All I've done here is provide facts about how voting works and not actually voiced any opinion on guns other than the proper way to open carry and improper ways to do it. So really your pissing contest isn't worth my time. If you come beck with FACTS then we can discuss those, otherwise feel free to exercise your right to vote if you don't like things and encourage others to do the same. You and I both know opinions won't be changed over who wins what pissing match on momconfessions.

Think the point went sailing right over your head. Constitutional rights are NOT up for popular vote.

[Baconqueen13]

Of course you won't. It's a constitutionally sound comparison.

No, it really isn't. I know you THINK it is because freedom of religion and right to bear arms are both part of the constitution but they aren't as they are worded differently and cover different objectives.

I happen to support the second amendment but you wouldn't believe it because you've got that "If you're not with me you're against me mentality" that relies on knee jerk reactions and a pissing match to see who shouts the loudest. All I've done here is provide facts about how voting works and not actually voiced any opinion on guns other than the proper way to open carry and improper ways to do it. So really your pissing contest isn't worth my time. If you come beck with FACTS then we can discuss those, otherwise feel free to exercise your right to vote if you don't like things and encourage others to do the same. You and I both know opinions won't be changed over who wins what pissing match on momconfessions.

Think the point went sailing right over your head. Constitutional rights are NOT up for popular vote.

And it's not. You are free to bear as many guns as your little arms can carry. That will never change, it would be unconstitutional. However that doesn't mean that they can't regulate the sale of firearms or require background checks for said sales. And for the record I'm a law-abiding gun owner. Yes, I own guns. I enjoy my guns. I like going down to the range and shooting my guns including my high powered rifles. I DON'T believe school shootings have anything to do with guns (let's look to mental health here y'all)and shouldn't affect gun laws etc. but I understand the position of others who disagree. I believe EDUCATION is the biggest ally gun owners and non gun owners and RESPONSIBLE gun ownership in general. As it is there are far too many insecure, mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots giving lawful gun owners a bad name and I see NO issue in punishing them for their idiocy when they utilize guns in an unsafe manner.

"RIGHT" to bear arms is different that "FREEDOM" of Religion. So it's a red herring to try to bring religion into it. Nice troll though.

[Della]

Background checks have been the rule for a long time now. Of course people support it, they can't conceive of anything else. And the red flag thing seems rationale on it's surface, but it is such a slippery slope that it should not be a law. When you can be stripped of your rights BEFORE going before a judge, that is a problem. That law needs a bit of tweaking before I could support it.

Why is it OK that the couple big cities get to control the whole state? That's BS, and it happens in nearly every state. Richmond controls VA, Chicago controls IL, NYC controls NY, Columbus & Cleveland control OH, LA and SF control CA, NO controls LA... it's the same everywhere. One or two liberal fucked up cities control the whole state... where people generally live a completely different kind of life, but those city slickers think they know it all. And it sounds a lot like you are the same way. YOU don't like it, so nobody should have it. At least that's what I'm getting from your comments. I apologize if I'm wrong, though. Yes, I believe that overall people in this country want their 2A rights un-infringed upon. I do realize that some people don't like that right for themselves, but they don't seem to understand that they are not forced to own a weapon, just don't mess with anyone else's right to own one. That's all.

I am glad to hear that the people in your county are taking their right seriously. It sucks that you are so small-minded that you are making fun of them, though.

The change in gun laws in Virginia include background checks for private sales, only one gun purchase every 30 days, enabling municipalities to ban guns at events which require a permit, and red flag laws which do require a judge to sign off. Again, if you are going to protest gun legislation, it's a good idea to know what legislation you are protesting against?
I am going by what I have read last couple weeks or so. If those proposed laws have been changed, then good. I know there was a proposal for letting up on a ban in exchange for a registry. I did not like that idea. I am not a fan of banning any weapons, nor am I a fan of a registry of weapons.
This was posted by our mayor regarding the Sanctuary County vote:
"Did it cross your mind that not all of us share in your sentiment and don’t want you to defend us? Are you asking the Board of Supervisors to create a totalitarian local government when you ask them to “rein in those elements of the county” who don’t agree with your point of view? We are all allowed to have an opinion and a voice. You’re infringing on other’s freedoms to support your own. I’d recommend taking a holistic approach rather than dividing the citizens of ___ County. You’ve gotta bring everyone to the table, not just your own faction, if you want change. Everyone can agree we need to do something about gun violence. That’s where you start the discussion, not by creating a group of domestic terrorists. ____’s better than this."
Who says I want anything to change? And why is it OK to infringe on rights I already have constitutionally? Nobody said that anyone had to go buy a gun.... If your opinion is that you don't want one, then you don't have to have one. How simple is that?!
This is what a local friend posted a few days ago:
"I have hunted in the past. I have lived with guns in my home for years. I have no problem with peaceful citizens possessing firearms. I am seriously considering purchasing a firearm in the near future. I have read the proposed legislation coming up for it's second attempt at passage and have no problem with it. I personally don't feel threatened by the government, state or otherwise. I do feel more than a little uncomfortable with an untrained, disorganized, group of strangers insisting that they know better than anyone what my rights may or may not be and how they are going to defend what they decide my rights are whether I want them to or not.
NO. I do not want to sit at that table and I can defend myself, if necessary. From people in that "militia" if need be."
I understand this guy a lot better, but... why does he not want everyone else to have the same rights he has? That "untrained, disorganized group of strangers" can very easily become trained and organized, and they may not all be strangers. They aren't trying to create new rights, they are simply trying to keep the rights that they, and your friend!, already have. Just because the state might not be wanting something that affects your friend and his rights today, doesn't mean it won't be coming for something next month, next year.... and if there is nobody to stand up for your friend when he needs it, what will happen then?
As a supporter of 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Counties and militias, how would you respond to these comments?

So, does this mean you think Americans should be able to possess RPG's, full auto weapons, tanks, and warships?

[Lemons]

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

Constitutional rights are not subject to the will of the people, which is my point that seems to escape many.

The will of the people sure is taking precedent over the impeachment trial currently. No witnesses, no documents, Republican senators telling their voters they have already made up their minds. It’s all about winning the next election.

I’m sure you have no problem with this and will find an excuse to why it’s different. It’s always different when you agree with what the politicians are doing.

[29again]

You are confusing land with population. Yes, rural counties like the one I live in are declaring themselves 2nd Amendment Sanctuaries. Populous counties are not. A vast majority of Virginians support the new gun laws passed in Richmond, including the 40% of my rural county that voted Democrat in 2018.

Please show me the new Virginia legislation that bans guns or requires registration of guns. Confiscation occurs when someone is red-flagged and why would you not want that?

"By large margins, voters support requiring background checks on all gun sales (86 percent to 13 percent) and passing a "red flag" law to allow guns to be temporarily removed from someone deemed a threat (73 percent to 23 percent). By a smaller margin (54 percent to 44 percent), they back a ban on assault-style weapons." Note that the ban on assault-style weapons was dropped.

I think of the phrase "We the People" as a collective term for all Americans, not a minority group within a state. You seem to think a majority of Virginians agree with these attending the rally in Richmond. You are wrong.

Our county had a "muster" this past Saturday, forming a county militia (ages 16-55) to preserve 2nd amendment. A bunch of these hee-haws were in Richmond today. No Thanks!

Background checks have been the rule for a long time now. Of course people support it, they can't conceive of anything else. And the red flag thing seems rationale on it's surface, but it is such a slippery slope that it should not be a law. When you can be stripped of your rights BEFORE going before a judge, that is a problem. That law needs a bit of tweaking before I could support it.

Why is it OK that the couple big cities get to control the whole state? That's BS, and it happens in nearly every state. Richmond controls VA, Chicago controls IL, NYC controls NY, Columbus & Cleveland control OH, LA and SF control CA, NO controls LA... it's the same everywhere. One or two liberal fucked up cities control the whole state... where people generally live a completely different kind of life, but those city slickers think they know it all. And it sounds a lot like you are the same way. YOU don't like it, so nobody should have it. At least that's what I'm getting from your comments. I apologize if I'm wrong, though. Yes, I believe that overall people in this country want their 2A rights un-infringed upon. I do realize that some people don't like that right for themselves, but they don't seem to understand that they are not forced to own a weapon, just don't mess with anyone else's right to own one. That's all.

I am glad to hear that the people in your county are taking their right seriously. It sucks that you are so small-minded that you are making fun of them, though.

Which big city controls Florida?

Well, Jacksonville is the largest city. I would have to say it's a toss-up between Jacksonville, Miami, and Tampa, though.

[29again]

The change in gun laws in Virginia include background checks for private sales, only one gun purchase every 30 days, enabling municipalities to ban guns at events which require a permit, and red flag laws which do require a judge to sign off. Again, if you are going to protest gun legislation, it's a good idea to know what legislation you are protesting against?
I am going by what I have read last couple weeks or so. If those proposed laws have been changed, then good. I know there was a proposal for letting up on a ban in exchange for a registry. I did not like that idea. I am not a fan of banning any weapons, nor am I a fan of a registry of weapons.
This was posted by our mayor regarding the Sanctuary County vote:
"Did it cross your mind that not all of us share in your sentiment and don’t want you to defend us? Are you asking the Board of Supervisors to create a totalitarian local government when you ask them to “rein in those elements of the county” who don’t agree with your point of view? We are all allowed to have an opinion and a voice. You’re infringing on other’s freedoms to support your own. I’d recommend taking a holistic approach rather than dividing the citizens of ___ County. You’ve gotta bring everyone to the table, not just your own faction, if you want change. Everyone can agree we need to do something about gun violence. That’s where you start the discussion, not by creating a group of domestic terrorists. ____’s better than this."
Who says I want anything to change? And why is it OK to infringe on rights I already have constitutionally? Nobody said that anyone had to go buy a gun.... If your opinion is that you don't want one, then you don't have to have one. How simple is that?!
This is what a local friend posted a few days ago:
"I have hunted in the past. I have lived with guns in my home for years. I have no problem with peaceful citizens possessing firearms. I am seriously considering purchasing a firearm in the near future. I have read the proposed legislation coming up for it's second attempt at passage and have no problem with it. I personally don't feel threatened by the government, state or otherwise. I do feel more than a little uncomfortable with an untrained, disorganized, group of strangers insisting that they know better than anyone what my rights may or may not be and how they are going to defend what they decide my rights are whether I want them to or not.
NO. I do not want to sit at that table and I can defend myself, if necessary. From people in that "militia" if need be."
I understand this guy a lot better, but... why does he not want everyone else to have the same rights he has? That "untrained, disorganized group of strangers" can very easily become trained and organized, and they may not all be strangers. They aren't trying to create new rights, they are simply trying to keep the rights that they, and your friend!, already have. Just because the state might not be wanting something that affects your friend and his rights today, doesn't mean it won't be coming for something next month, next year.... and if there is nobody to stand up for your friend when he needs it, what will happen then?
As a supporter of 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Counties and militias, how would you respond to these comments?

So, does this mean you think Americans should be able to possess RPG's, full auto weapons, tanks, and warships?

Yep. Of course, I have nowhere to keep a warship, or a tank, nor could I afford either one. But if I had the space and the money, why shouldn't I?

[Della]

Background checks have been the rule for a long time now. Of course people support it, they can't conceive of anything else. And the red flag thing seems rationale on it's surface, but it is such a slippery slope that it should not be a law. When you can be stripped of your rights BEFORE going before a judge, that is a problem. That law needs a bit of tweaking before I could support it.

Why is it OK that the couple big cities get to control the whole state? That's BS, and it happens in nearly every state. Richmond controls VA, Chicago controls IL, NYC controls NY, Columbus & Cleveland control OH, LA and SF control CA, NO controls LA... it's the same everywhere. One or two liberal fucked up cities control the whole state... where people generally live a completely different kind of life, but those city slickers think they know it all. And it sounds a lot like you are the same way. YOU don't like it, so nobody should have it. At least that's what I'm getting from your comments. I apologize if I'm wrong, though. Yes, I believe that overall people in this country want their 2A rights un-infringed upon. I do realize that some people don't like that right for themselves, but they don't seem to understand that they are not forced to own a weapon, just don't mess with anyone else's right to own one. That's all.

I am glad to hear that the people in your county are taking their right seriously. It sucks that you are so small-minded that you are making fun of them, though.

Which big city controls Florida?

Well, Jacksonville is the largest city. I would have to say it's a toss-up between Jacksonville, Miami, and Tampa, though.

There is a world of difference between these cities.

J'ville (Duval County) is the largest land wise (it's actually the largest county in the country thanks to consolidation), but it's not near as populated as Miami or Tampa - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... opulation).

We have to use the "metropolitan" areas (surrounding counties; St. John's, Nassau, Clay and Baker to even get to over a million people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonvi ... litan_area

And there is a world of difference between all three. J'ville is North Florida, just around 25 miles from the FL/GA line. Some people refer to us as south Georgia, lol (ever heard of Georgia ice cream? It's grits, lol!). Get down by Tampa/Orlando and below, and it's like crossing the Mason-Dixon line.

Take a look - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Unit ... county.png

I reckon that's why we're a "swing state". And, yes, I do use the word "reckon", lol.