Law Supreme Court Refuses to Drop 2A Case, Despite NYC Pleas - The Supreme Court on Monday signaled their willingness to hear the first Second Amendment case in a decade

Freedom Fries

kiwifarms.net
This "America vs the Army" is a false dichotomy when trying to argue about what an average citizen can and cannot own under the 2A.

The Army IS American, there will be refusals to use that overwhelming force against citizenry. Plus, there will be thefts, raids and outright defections that means within ten minutes of any hot Civil War breaking out, both sides are going to have equipment parity in short order, and the standing uniformed Army is going to have a LOT of trouble leveraging theirs as the VC showed that guerrilla tactics can win the day against a superior foe as long as they have the will to keep taking casualties.

So no, the 2A is not useless because the Average Joe can't own a TOW missile. He doesn't NEED one to effectively resist a tank whose crew defected, whose ammunition stockpiles were stolen and whose fuel supplies were sabotaged.
I'm by no means stating that our current right to keep weapons is useless or that a guerrilla campaign against some hypothetical future tyrannical power would be impossible. I'm just saying that the 2nd Amendment has proven not to be insurmountable at all and that when people could have revolted or whatever to keep it allowing everything, they didn't.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
He can, but I'll laugh at him for spending more to do less than I could with some farming ingenuity.

Sabotaging roadways would wreak more havoc on a military convoy than one anti-tank rocket.

The rocket means one vehicle doesn't make it to the objective on time.

A blown bridge means none of them do.
Counterpoint: rockets are cool.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: XYZpdq and Unog

MembersSchoolPizza

Sworn Brother of the Cult of Browning
kiwifarms.net
I'm just saying that the 2nd Amendment has proven not to be insurmountable at all and that when people could have revolted or whatever to keep it allowing everything, they didn't.
It's possible you're right, that there may be no point that would ever spark an revolt.

On the other hand, I would say that it's a weak premise to suppose that because people were willing to tolerate some restrictions they will tolerate all restrictions.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Unog and Syaoran Li

Vecr

"nanoposts with 90° spatial rotational symmetries"
kiwifarms.net
All people will tolerate some restrictions

Some people will tolerate all restrictions

But almost no people will tolerate complete restriction
What's the differences between "all" and "complete"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deven

JohnDoe

You're getting penetrated in this alley, buddy.
kiwifarms.net
Trying to snake themselves from getting fucked by the Supreme court by actively undoing the law they put in place...that doesn't fly in any way. Once you are on the legal track, good luck getting off of it.
One thing I've noticed about judges, Democrat, Republican, whatever - they all have a severe case of self-assured entitlement. Right or wrong, they are all more or less accustomed to being near-absolute gods in their own courtrooms, serving only under the nearly inconceivable threat of impeachment/recall or the chidings of an upper court. The Supreme Court can't be overruled, and their high political station means that unless they rape and murder a child on live TV while Heiling Hitler they ain't getting impeached. I'm talking about medieval Pope-levels of god complex here.

The very last thing you want to do to a judge is even give the hint that you're trying to undermine their power, or disrespect their position. Nothing will deplete their Fucks Given to zero faster than obviously transparent attempts to wriggle away from their RIGHT to pass judgement on your ass. They represent the System, and the System Must Be Respected, so prepare to have an example made out of your dumb, arrogant ass.

I'm so glad the idiots in Jew York tried to pull these shenanigans, and even happier the Democrats wrote that threatening letter. I want that threat to stay with the Supremes until the ink dries on their decision. I want them to be so mad and spite-filled that they skullfuck NY just to make a point about threatening the Court.

It'll hopefully be the follow-up to the obviously Constitutional logic that will deliver the headshot of overturning New York's laws along with the NFA and GCA.
 

Slimy Time

Rape Face #3
kiwifarms.net
One thing I've noticed about judges, Democrat, Republican, whatever - they all have a severe case of self-assured entitlement. Right or wrong, they are all more or less accustomed to being near-absolute gods in their own courtrooms, serving only under the nearly inconceivable threat of impeachment/recall or the chidings of an upper court. The Supreme Court can't be overruled, and their high political station means that unless they rape and murder a child on live TV while Heiling Hitler they ain't getting impeached. I'm talking about medieval Pope-levels of god complex here.

The very last thing you want to do to a judge is even give the hint that you're trying to undermine their power, or disrespect their position. Nothing will deplete their Fucks Given to zero faster than obviously transparent attempts to wriggle away from their RIGHT to pass judgement on your ass. They represent the System, and the System Must Be Respected, so prepare to have an example made out of your dumb, arrogant ass.

I'm so glad the idiots in Jew York tried to pull these shenanigans, and even happier the Democrats wrote that threatening letter. I want that threat to stay with the Supremes until the ink dries on their decision. I want them to be so mad and spite-filled that they skullfuck NY just to make a point about threatening the Court.

It'll hopefully be the follow-up to the obviously Constitutional logic that will deliver the headshot of overturning New York's laws along with the NFA and GCA.
They pretty much are Gods of the courtroom. Unlike any other position, you can't tell the judge he or she is a fucking idiot when they get something wrong, they will almost immediately move to have you punished in some way. How many cases have we covered here in A&H or the Legal section where the judge blatantly disregards rules or doesn't do prep, and the lawyers and their clients have to eat shit and smile until they can appeal? Even cops you can insult to some degree before they decide to piss all over you. Do that to a judge in the middle of court, as stupid as it may be, and you might be spending time in jail with some real legal consequences hanging over you. No other job allows this. Writing a threatening letter is a really, really stupid thing to do, especially at the supreme court level.
 

Power Word: YEET

kiwifarms.net
it's a waste of money.

Fuel oil and ammonium nitrate are legal to buy, cheaper, and simpler to use.

That means that every freeway overpass, every bridge, every tunnel, every road cut, every single drainage culvert becomes a potential tank-killer. If you think the populace can't knock out a tank without military-grade AP shells, well, the Army thought that in Vietnam.....and Iraq, they've lost more armor to steel plates and old TNT than T72's and missiles.

I don't know if letting civvies own a Javelin is a good idea, or a bad idea, or proper under the 2A, I just do know this:

It's not NEEDED to be a threat to the army's hardware.
Note that the US uses ANFO for something like 80% of their civilian domestic explosive use. This is something like 5 billion pounds of explosives per year. The US military is woefully unprepared for any campaign where there's enough civilian support to divert even a small fraction of this towards insurgent ends.

He can, but I'll laugh at him for spending more to do less than I could with some farming ingenuity.

Sabotaging roadways would wreak more havoc on a military convoy than one anti-tank rocket.

The rocket means one vehicle doesn't make it to the objective on time.

A blown bridge means none of them do.
It's not even about blowing up bridges, it's turning roads into something that the military cannot safely use without incurring casualties. This cripples their ability to operate effectively - the British had to move everything around by helicopter in Northern Ireland when the IRA was setting up culvert bombs.
 

AnOminous

I'm not mad at anyone, honest.
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
it's a waste of money.

Fuel oil and ammonium nitrate are legal to buy, cheaper, and simpler to use.
Buy a lot of ammonium nitrate and you'll attract some attention. People who deal with lots of it have to deal with lots of red tape too.

Note that the US uses ANFO for something like 80% of their civilian domestic explosive use. This is something like 5 billion pounds of explosives per year. The US military is woefully unprepared for any campaign where there's enough civilian support to divert even a small fraction of this towards insurgent ends.
It has so many legitimate uses that it would be very impractical to stop it if this started to happen. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is ridiculously common and used in huge amounts. I think in recent years they've moved more to other products but there's plenty of it still used.
 

3119967d0c

رنج آمریکایی ها
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
It's not even about blowing up bridges, it's turning roads into something that the military cannot safely use without incurring casualties. This cripples their ability to operate effectively - the British had to move everything around by helicopter in Northern Ireland when the IRA was setting up culvert bombs.
This went in tandem with the IRA's very effective urban sniping tactics. The book 'Fry the Brain' has good coverage of this. Attempts to deploy soldiers to control chokepoints and prevent larger scale attacks would be met with a few shots from an iron-sighted AR-15 or AR-18 quickly disposed of, a dead soldier, and a bunch of resources tied up for quite some time.

They were also able to perform more sophisticated attacks with improvised mortars that could be mounted in trucks or vans and directed at enemy installations to hit targets from several hundred yards away.

Of course, being able to effectively implement such strategies is dependant on having large homogeneous population areas aligned with your cause. This is what Section 8 and Trump's 'as long as they come legally' is intended to compromise. This is what snitch devices like the 'Ring video doorbell' are meant to sabotage.

At which point the guns they don't want us to have could be used to ensure we retain the right to own them 🤔
When has that ever happened?

Red blooded AMMURRICAN MARINE VETERANS are having their guns stolen under 'Red Flag' laws for saying that they will engage in self-defence against Zionist terrorists (antifa) if attacked. Has even one of these victims shot the pigs stealing his guns? Will any conservatives shoot the pigs stealing his guns because he had something that has since been prohibited and his girlfriend/wife/mom got pissed at him and reported it? Of course they won't.

This "America vs the Army" is a false dichotomy when trying to argue about what an average citizen can and cannot own under the 2A.

The Army IS American, there will be refusals to use that overwhelming force against citizenry...

So no, the 2A is not useless because the Average Joe can't own a TOW missile. He doesn't NEED one to effectively resist a tank whose crew defected, whose ammunition stockpiles were stolen and whose fuel supplies were sabotaged.
It's a nice narrative but wishful thinking. The US military continues to work on improving their capabilities as a force against domestic expression of political dissent. And I'm not just talking about training against the legitimate resistance in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In the Clinton years, the Army paid for at least one large study about whether troops would cooperate with unlawful orders to suppress the American people. It found that many would. The demographics have changed, both in the military and in the wider American society. Naturally, more would now comply with such orders than before.

And for those who rely on actual combat troops being mainly Southern, mainly founding-stock American, mainly believers in Muh Constitution? Forget it. Anyone deemed unreliable will simply be left fighting "Clean Break" wars for Zionism in the Middle East, while Puerto Rican loggies in M113s round up potential resistors.
 

MembersSchoolPizza

Sworn Brother of the Cult of Browning
kiwifarms.net
In the Clinton years, the Army paid for at least one large study about whether troops would cooperate with unlawful orders to suppress the American people. It found that many would. The demographics have changed, both in the military and in the wider American society. Naturally, more would now comply with such orders than before.
Naturally no such thing.

And it doesn't matter in any event. First of all,unless the *overwhelming majority* would, it's completely fucking irrelevant. The military can't act if a sizable percentage of itself is in outright rebellion against the other part of itself. At the least, it can't act efficiently or effectively.

It's also a nebulous claim to begin with - to what extent would they cooperate? Would they agree to do something that technically was a Posse Comitatus violation? Sure, I can see that. Would they actively start razing civilian areas? No, I don't think so. Not enough of them to matter.

And for those who rely on actual combat troops being mainly Southern, mainly founding-stock American, mainly believers in Muh Constitution? Forget it. Anyone deemed unreliable will simply be left fighting "Clean Break" wars for Zionism in the Middle East, while Puerto Rican loggies in M113s round up potential resistors.
Ok, first of all, Puerto Ricans make up slightly more than two percent of our military population. Second, across our entire military only about 15% of our strength is actively deployed abroad, leaving 85% of it at home. And that doesn't say anything about the national guard, which is deployed abroad only in very small numbers.

Get better numbers, man.
 

Syaoran Li

Clown World on PCP
kiwifarms.net
This went in tandem with the IRA's very effective urban sniping tactics. The book 'Fry the Brain' has good coverage of this. Attempts to deploy soldiers to control chokepoints and prevent larger scale attacks would be met with a few shots from an iron-sighted AR-15 or AR-18 quickly disposed of, a dead soldier, and a bunch of resources tied up for quite some time.

They were also able to perform more sophisticated attacks with improvised mortars that could be mounted in trucks or vans and directed at enemy installations to hit targets from several hundred yards away.

Of course, being able to effectively implement such strategies is dependant on having large homogeneous population areas aligned with your cause. This is what Section 8 and Trump's 'as long as they come legally' is intended to compromise. This is what snitch devices like the 'Ring video doorbell' are meant to sabotage.


When has that ever happened?

Red blooded AMMURRICAN MARINE VETERANS are having their guns stolen under 'Red Flag' laws for saying that they will engage in self-defence against Zionist terrorists (antifa) if attacked. Has even one of these victims shot the pigs stealing his guns? Will any conservatives shoot the pigs stealing his guns because he had something that has since been prohibited and his girlfriend/wife/mom got pissed at him and reported it? Of course they won't.


It's a nice narrative but wishful thinking. The US military continues to work on improving their capabilities as a force against domestic expression of political dissent. And I'm not just talking about training against the legitimate resistance in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In the Clinton years, the Army paid for at least one large study about whether troops would cooperate with unlawful orders to suppress the American people. It found that many would. The demographics have changed, both in the military and in the wider American society. Naturally, more would now comply with such orders than before.

And for those who rely on actual combat troops being mainly Southern, mainly founding-stock American, mainly believers in Muh Constitution? Forget it. Anyone deemed unreliable will simply be left fighting "Clean Break" wars for Zionism in the Middle East, while Puerto Rican loggies in M113s round up potential resistors.
Here's the thing you're not considering....

The United States is a very wealthy superpower with an economy so large that it has a major impact on the rest of the world's economic prosperity. The main reason why Americans in general are so unlikely to present a major resistance to government overreach is because your average American has a fairly comfortable life, even if they're part of the lower classes. The people are less likely to revolt if they have regular access to food, water, and electricity. It's all about comfort and not really about racial demographics and nefarious Zionist groups. Bread and Circuses is one of the oldest tricks in the book and it's also one of the most effective.

If things got so bad that an actual Second American Civil War broke out, a lot of the old rules and assumptions would fly out the window. It doesn't matter if you're white, black, Jewish, or Puerto Rican, we all gotta keep food on the table and a roof over our heads.

If the military is being deployed against their own populace, then that mean the shit has really hit the fan. The active-duty military can only be deployed on American soil if Congress declares martial law. Given how polarized Congress is, even within the ranks of a single party, then the situation must be truly dire for them to agree on declaring martial law.
 

Mazinkaiser

kiwifarms.net
I gave up hope for the Supreme Court to give us any leeway since Scalia died, but hey, this might be a good thing. Not entirely sure if we’re gonna get a solid ruling in our favor, but if they’re planning on doing something big enough to where they would refuse to have it shot down by the second worst 2A state on the east coast, I assume it’ll be in our favor
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
The United States is a very wealthy superpower with an economy so large that it has a major impact on the rest of the world's economic prosperity. The main reason why Americans in general are so unlikely to present a major resistance to government overreach is because your average American has a fairly comfortable life, even if they're part of the lower classes. The people are less likely to revolt if they have regular access to food, water, and electricity. It's all about comfort and not really about racial demographics and nefarious Zionist groups. Bread and Circuses is one of the oldest tricks in the book and it's also one of the most effective.
This has been the common wisdom and I agreed with it for a long time but our founders were mostly upper middle class folks with comfortbale lives and meanwhile places that have had the life utterly crushed out of them like Venezuala and North Korea prove incapable of toppling their governments.

I think revolution is a healthy, driven man's game and that it can only be pulled off by people whose wills haven't been broken. Same reason your Osama bin Laden types tend to be rich dudes and not random goatfuckers.
 

3119967d0c

رنج آمریکایی ها
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
The United States is a very wealthy superpower with an economy so large that it has a major impact on the rest of the world's economic prosperity. The main reason why Americans in general are so unlikely to present a major resistance to government overreach is because your average American has a fairly comfortable life, even if they're part of the lower classes. The people are less likely to revolt if they have regular access to food, water, and electricity. It's all about comfort and not really about racial demographics and nefarious Zionist groups. Bread and Circuses is one of the oldest tricks in the book and it's also one of the most effective.
Agreed, Americans being fat, lazy pussies in general is the main reason that most will never resist government-imposed tranny bathrooms and drag-queens grooming their children.

Ok, first of all, Puerto Ricans make up slightly more than two percent of our military population.
Clearly I was not just giving an example of a group which would be perfectly happy to oppress founding-stock Americans. You are very incisive.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino