I don't need any government to tell me if I have their permission to defend myself

Published

I don't need any government to tell me if I have their permission to defend myself. If I feel threatened, I am going to carry, period. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.  Especially when I worked in homecare and went into some shady neighborhoods. I am 6' 4", 240 lb guy with a great deal of Native AmerIcan blood, myancestry tagged me around 75%. I am told I look mean and people are initially intimidated by me, but I think that is because I can see through them and frankly hate most people.  When 3 crackheads tried to jump me in Detroit, I will just say I kicked the tar out of them and still have a knife that they pulled on me (along with scars on my knuckles from knocking their teeth out). They messed with the wrong guy when they messed with a trained fighter. If they had a gun, I would have been a victim. My ancestors were victims, but I refuse to be one. Having a locked and loaded 44 under my pillow and a 357 within reach helps me sleep better at night. It levels the playing field.  My idea of an endangered species is anyone who comes through my door without my permission. You wanna see your god, try me. I will give you an instant, one way ticket to the resurrection should you enter my abode without my permission and intending me harm. . I don't need any government permission to defend myself. The government has this proven, uncanny ability to destroy everything it gets its hands on, especially healthcare. Minimal or better yet, no government is the best choice, they are about as significant to me as that speck of dog poop that I flung onto my neighbor's yard this evening. I hate them as well, but they don't mess with me. In fact, they seem afraid of me, which is fine. I like it that way.  They had Biden signs on their lawns in the last, stolen election so from that day forward  I knew they were both ignorant and stupid as well.  Having and carrying a nice, warm gun gives me peace of mind.  You whiny, liberal wimps can bellyache all you want, but after you allow yourselves to become victims, know you had a chance not to have put yourself in that predicament. 

Specializes in Home care/Travel.
toomuchbaloney said:

No. Biden was not being sworn in. 

The election results were being certified by a joint session of congress. The violent mob was assembled by Trump and he then incited them to march to the Capitol and STOP THE STEAL.  That's when they targeted and overwhelmed the police before they broke into the building and stopped the official business of the United States Congress. Members of Congress and the second and third officials in line for the presidency had to be hurried to secure locations for their own safety. 

The events of January 6th WERE  a violent uprising against the federal government.  The misguided and angry mob literally stopped the certification of the free and fair election results.  

What do I need to say? Engaging in violent behavior is not okay and it got them arrested.  The local law enforcement team is going to throw the book at them, perhaps in a retaliatory way.  

Meanwhile a republican legislator stood on a stage at CPAC this week and recommended getting rid of the FBI and DOJ.

Use your search engine of choice to find the story conclusion about the antiabortion activist that pushed the 72 year old.  

That's correct. They were not swearing in Biden. My mistake. 

So the rioter's main goal was to get into fights with capital police? From your comment above: 

Quote

The misguided and angry mob literally stopped the certification of the free and fair election results.  

Exactly. It was not to interfere or attack police directly. Violence against police occurred during their attempt  because they were trying to stop them. There was no direct political motive against the police. (Doesn't make right, no excuse). Also they only delayed the certification. It still happened. So your exaggeration is not needed. 

I KNOW it was a violent uprising. Never said otherwise. And I  am happy that the people involved were charged. So that point is moot. 

Encouraging people to "peacefully and patriotucally make your voices heard" is NOT an incitement to violence. And until, or if they press charges for Trumps blatant "crimes" every person needs to shut it. 

Well perhaps they can get together with the democrats to get rids of or defend all the police? And the FBI?  Both ideas are remarkable ridiculous.  Any polititi9n saying this is obviously playing hype for their party. 

Anti abortion activist? Pushed a old man? Well he is a criminal and needs to be charged. What do you want me to say? You tend to be the primary member that doesn't seen to express any outrageous to violence unless it on the right. 

 

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:

That's correct. They were not swearing in Biden. My mistake. 

So the rioter's main goal was to get into fights with capital police? From your comment above: 

Exactly. It was not to interfere or attack police directly. Violence against police occurred during their attempt  because they were trying to stop them. There was no direct political motive against the police. (Doesn't make right, no excuse). Also they only delayed the certification. It still happened. So your exaggeration is not needed. 

I KNOW it was a violent uprising. Never said otherwise. And I  am happy that the people involved were charged. So that point is moot. 

Encouraging people to "peacefully and patriotucally make your voices heard" is NOT an incitement to violence. And until, or if they press charges for Trumps blatant "crimes" every person needs to shut it. 

Well perhaps they can get together with the democrats to get rids of or defend all the police? And the FBI?  Both ideas are remarkable ridiculous.  Any polititi9n saying this is obviously playing hype for their party. 

Anti abortion activist? Pushed a old man? Well he is a criminal and needs to be charged. What do you want me to say? You tend to be the primary member that doesn't seen to express any outrageous to violence unless it on the right. 

 

The political agenda was to stop the peaceful transfer of power.  The insurrectionists managed to delay the certification of the election.  That is a big deal rather than an "only". 

Maybe you haven't listened to Trump's speech from January 6, 2021 and didn't read his tweets and so you are unaware of his speech that clearly compelled his angry supporters to march to the Capitol and STOP THE STEAL.

The article behind the firewall was the conclusion to the case that you cited... the one about the arrest. I didn't ask you to say anything.  I asked what was important in the case you brought up... what he did, how he was arrested, or the verdict? I asked because it seemed odd that you only commented about the circumstances of the arrest, not what he said he did or that he was acquitted.

Yes, I'm aware of your opinion of me. I seem to have annoyed you.  

Specializes in Dialysis.
Netshark said:

This topic is ridiculous.  I do not even believe this is a real "conservative". Too many "conservative" stereotypes. 

 

I hear ya! I'm middle of the road conservative that believes in 2A and would never discuss in this manner. This OP is aggressive 

Specializes in Home care/Travel.
toomuchbaloney said:

The political agenda was to stop the peaceful transfer of power.  The insurrectionists managed to delay the certification of the election.  That is a big deal rather than an "only". 

Maybe you haven't listened to Trump's speech from January 6, 2021 and didn't read his tweets and so you are unaware of his speech that clearly compelled his angry supporters to march to the Capitol and STOP THE STEAL.

The article behind the firewall was the conclusion to the case that you cited... the one about the arrest. I didn't ask you to say anything.  I asked what was important in the case you brought up... what he did, how he was arrested, or the verdict? I asked because it seemed odd that you only commented about the circumstances of the arrest, not what he said he did or that he was acquitted.

Yes, I'm aware of your opinion of me. I seem to have annoyed you.  

Yes. He said to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". Yes. It was a big deal. We've heard about it non stop since it happened....

I told you why I mentioned the case. 

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:

Yes. He said to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". Yes. It was a big deal. We've heard about it non stop since it happened....

I told you why I mentioned the case. 

Yep...Trump incited the insurrection.  If it was a big deal why do you minimize it with your own words? 

Yep... you mentioned the case because of the way the fellow was arrested.  You believed that the method of arrest was indicative of the mistreatment of conservatives, that was the important part for you.  LOL 

Specializes in Home care/Travel.
toomuchbaloney said:

Yep...Trump incited the insurrection.  If it was a big deal why do you minimize it with your own words? 

Yep... you mentioned the case because of the way the fellow was arrested.  You believed that the method of arrest was indicative of the mistreatment of conservatives, that was the important part for you.  LOL 

I feel that the arrest of a man by 25 to 40 heavily armed FBI agents in front of his young family is militant and unnecessary.  Abuse of power for a political agenda. 

The fact he was conservative is irrelevant.  You apparently feel that it was acceptable because he is a conservative.  

Specializes in Home care/Travel.
nursej22 said:

Are you questioning my sincerity or just calling me stupid? 

From what I've read, it's not clear to me what, if any political affiliation the protesters in Atlanta have. And it appears to be a collection of loosely aligned people. 

 

I don't call people names. So no. I'm not calling you stupid. Perhaps disingenuous.  (Descriptor, not a name) 

One can speculate that these terrorist were most likely not of the conservative variety. And most likely be correct. 

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:

I don't call people names. So no. I'm not calling you stupid. Perhaps disingenuous.  (Descriptor, not a name) 

One can speculate that these terrorist were most likely not of the conservative variety. And most likely be correct. 

Are you advocating speculation in this case? 

Specializes in Home care/Travel.
toomuchbaloney said:

Are you advocating speculation in this case? 

By all means, if you have some evidence to the contrary, please do share. 

 

+ Add a Comment