Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

[unofan]

Really? I put him down as a sexist and racist based on his Twitter and YouTube postings.

https://twitter.com/ConvosWithCosmo
http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/17/b...ed-against-crackers-on-youtube-channel-video/

I don't see how being a sovereign citizen precludes him from also being a racist and/or sexist. Hell, many sovereign citizens are also white supremacists. And you'll note that most (all?) of the dildo revolution crew was male.

Sovereign citizens are all nut jobs by definition. If you meet one, just turn and walk away, because they're certifiable.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

I don't see how being a sovereign citizen precludes him from also being a racist and/or sexist. Hell, many sovereign citizens are also white supremacists. And you'll note that most (all?) of the dildo revolution crew was male.

Sovereign citizens are all nut jobs by definition. If you meet one, just turn and walk away, because they're certifiable.

There was an interesting guest on one of the XM political shows today (POTUS, maybe?) who talked about the evolution of Sovereign Citizens groups. They started in the '70s as blatantly racist and anti-Semitic. In fact, one of their "facts" was that a white person could declare himself a "sovereign citizen" and be exempt from taxes, but a "14th Amendment citizen" (ahem, c.f. "darkie") could not because his citizenship was a "gift" from the government and thus he was a government slave.

In the '90s black sovereign citizen movements started cropping up. These movements sprang from black supremacist groups who believed black people were the original settlers of the Americas and that the Louisiana Purchase is null because Jefferson purchased the land from the French and not the rightful owners, the "mound builders," descendants of the Adena and Hopewell peoples of about 3500 BC. Who it turns out were black because reasons. To them, whites can't be sovereign because blue-eyed devil, no soul, etc.

I imagine these folks would be totally cool at a cookout together.

 

[The Sicatoka]

I don't see how being a sovereign citizen precludes him from also being a racist and/or sexist.

Sovereign citizens are all nut jobs by definition. If you meet one, just turn and walk away, because they're certifiable.

There we'll agree.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Funny thing is, during militarized cop exercises in California, some of the actors were trained to yell "I'm a sovereign". Like anyone would actually admit that...

 

[Handyman]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

There was an interesting guest on one of the XM political shows today (POTUS, maybe?) who talked about the evolution of Sovereign Citizens groups. They started in the '70s as blatantly racist and anti-Semitic. In fact, one of their "facts" was that a white person could declare himself a "sovereign citizen" and be exempt from taxes, but a "14th Amendment citizen" (ahem, c.f. "darkie") could not because his citizenship was a "gift" from the government and thus he was a government slave.

In the '90s black sovereign citizen movements started cropping up. These movements sprang from black supremacist groups who believed black people were the original settlers of the Americas and that the Louisiana Purchase is null because Jefferson purchased the land from the French and not the rightful owners, the "mound builders," descendants of the Adena and Hopewell peoples of about 3500 BC. Who it turns out were black because reasons. To them, whites can't be sovereign because blue-eyed devil, no soul, etc.

I imagine these folks would be totally cool at a cookout together.

Sounds like the Republican Convention in Cleveland

 

[SteveP]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

The press conference from Baton Rouge has been chilling and heartbreaking.

To quote the sister of slain BRPD Officer Montrell Jackson, "It’s coming to the point where no lives matter."

Stand easy, officers...your shift is over.

 

[MaizeRage]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

That said, it's ironic that the African American sovereign citizen followed through on his second amendment solution, while the good ole boys out west just strutted around brandishing their guns before caving in like the cowards they were.

Two idiots from the Bundy ranch went out and killed two cops and another citizen. But because white people get to be their own unique little flowers, they weren't considered affiliated, despite living there for weeks and speaking on behalf of the group on TV.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

You want to own a gun, possess a gun, use it for hunting or target shooting, or even to defend yourself or your family, I'll back you to the end. You want to take that gun out in public and shoot at people, rob a store or take possession of someone's property, you're on your own.

I have no problem making that distinction. In neither case do I blame the gun or gun ownership. What separates the two are mental illness and misguided beliefs on the part of the latter.

Problem with guns vs. say a tooth brush re carry policy is that guns put others at risk. If it was open carry, at least others would know when there is a threat to them...regardless of whether the carrier was a good guy or bad...and they could take steps to avoid it.

That is to say that this guns carry right infringes on the rights of others. Just as someone with boulders in their front yard can't move them to your yard, the vast majority societal norms make the person with the original problem solve it without infringing on others. Guns are a solitary exception.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Problem with guns vs. say a tooth brush re carry policy is that guns put others at risk. If it was open carry, at least others would know when there is a threat to them...regardless of whether the carrier was a good guy or bad...and they could take steps to avoid it.

That is to say that this guns carry right infringes on the rights of others. Just as someone with boulders in their front yard can't move them to your yard, the vast majority societal norms make the person with the original problem solve it without infringing on others. Guns are a solitary exception.

Except as far as I know...in most places, open carry is more legal than concealed carry and easier to do technically speaking...most choose not to do it because it tends to incite other people and cause more problems from interactions with people who aren't comfortable.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Except as far as I know...in most places, open carry is more legal than concealed carry and easier to do technically speaking...most choose not to do it because it tends to incite other people and cause more problems from interactions with people who aren't comfortable.

Don't think that changes the point though.

15 minute terrorist rampage on a German train today. Guy could have killed dozens, but nobody was killed. Why? Because he only had an axe. Idiot should have had a gun...but I guess he couldn't get one.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Don't think that changes the point though.

15 minute terrorist rampage on a German train today. Guy could have killed dozens, but nobody was killed. Why? Because he only had an axe. Idiot should have had a gun...but I guess he couldn't get one.

And yet any of us could get a truck.

Do you think I shouldn't have guns? At what point shouldn't I have guns? I use them for hunting mostly, some target practice. At various points in my life I've struggled with depression. Heck even today, I struggle with things related to my weight and my relationships like probably most people. At what point do I no longer have a right to have a gun?

 

[Husky1]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

And yet any of us could get a truck.

Do you think I shouldn't have guns? At what point shouldn't I have guns? I use them for hunting mostly, some target practice. At various points in my life I've struggled with depression. Heck even today, I struggle with things related to my weight and my relationships like probably most people. At what point do I no longer have a right to have a gun?

You can have a gun, a nice hunting rifle or pistol. No one should be allowed to have an AR-15 or similar. Our country as a whole has proven that we can't handle these weapons and whatever imaginary benefits they confer are easily offset by the amount of killing they have enabled. If you want to shoot one go to a range.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

You can have a gun, a nice hunting rifle or pistol. No one should be allowed to have an AR-15 or similar. Our country as a whole has proven that we can't handle these weapons and whatever imaginary benefits they confer are easily offset by the amount of killing they have enabled. If you want to shoot one go to a range.

Do you really think I couldn't modify my "nice hunting rifle to take bigger clips and shoot as well as your scary AR-15? The guy that shot the cops in dallas did a ton of damage with a hunting rifle.
Unless someone has a bolt/lever action rifle, EVERY OTHER hunting rifle is semi-automatic. I own 3 guns and 2 are semiautomatic. each currently hold 5 rounds, but I could easily get a different clip for my rifle to hold more and there are variations of my shotguns that hold probably 10 rounds out there if I wanted them. Since I use them mostly for waterfowl which is legally limited to 3 rounds, I see little point.

I'm sure bigblue has tried to have this discussion more than one occasion but that fact that most people seem to think "nice hunting rifles" are ok but AR-15 or similar are not don't really understand that there really isn't that much different about them.

This is essentially what I use for deer hunting:
http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/5837/8716257_1.jpg?v=8CC31D7B43D1930

This is what the dallas shooter used (or at least a variation):
https://s3.amazonaws.com/mgm-conten...26917_01_wts_wtt_saiga_iz_240_5_45x39_640.jpg

 

[Husky1]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Do you really think I couldn't modify my "nice hunting rifle to take bigger clips and shoot as well as your scary AR-15? The guy that shot the cops in dallas did a ton of damage with a hunting rifle.
Unless someone has a bolt/lever action rifle, EVERY OTHER hunting rifle is semi-automatic. I own 3 guns and 2 are semiautomatic. each currently hold 5 rounds, but I could easily get a different clip for my rifle to hold more and there are variations of my shotguns that hold probably 10 rounds out there if I wanted them. Since I use them mostly for waterfowl which is legally limited to 3 rounds, I see little point.

I'm sure bigblue has tried to have this discussion more than one occasion but that fact that most people seem to think "nice hunting rifles" are ok but AR-15 or similar are not don't really understand that there really isn't that much different about them.

This is essentially what I use for deer hunting:
http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/5837/8716257_1.jpg?v=8CC31D7B43D1930

This is what the dallas shooter used (or at least a variation):
https://s3.amazonaws.com/mgm-conten...26917_01_wts_wtt_saiga_iz_240_5_45x39_640.jpg

Fair enough, then you cant have a nice hunting rifle either unless it is a bolt/lever action. I don't think much about how someone can rig up a rifle to kill more effectively.

The larger point here is 90% or more of the guns/gun accessories we allow are wildly unnecessary. They might be fun to shoot but the danger is obviously too great based on myriad examples. I wish most people got that but apparently they don't because whenever a mass shooting happens there are far too many people that think the answer is to have more good guys with guns. That might be an easier solution but not the correct one.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Don't think that changes the point though.

15 minute terrorist rampage on a German train today. Guy could have killed dozens, but nobody was killed. Why? Because he only had an axe. Idiot should have had a gun...but I guess he couldn't get one.

Guy injured a few people. Same could happen with a gun. Nice try on pushing the agenda, but it didn't work.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

You can have a gun, a nice hunting rifle or pistol. No one should be allowed to have an AR-15 or similar. Our country as a whole has proven that we can't handle these weapons and whatever imaginary benefits they confer are easily offset by the amount of killing they have enabled. If you want to shoot one go to a range.

AR-15 was civilian created and not originally meant for military. But don't let facts get in the way of trying to make us defenceless from oppression.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

AR-15 was civilian created and not originally meant for military. But don't let facts get in the way of trying to make us defenceless from oppression.

Not quite. It's original incarnation was as an automatic weapon, and Colt marketed it to the military. The semi-automatic is, and always has been the civilian modification of the original automatic version.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

The larger point here is 90% or more of the guns/gun accessories we allow are wildly unnecessary. They might be fun to shoot but the danger is obviously too great based on myriad examples.

Balderdash. AR-15s account for a minuscule fraction of gun deaths. Even fewer yet are mass shootings.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

And yet any of us could get a truck.

Do you think I shouldn't have guns? At what point shouldn't I have guns? I use them for hunting mostly, some target practice. At various points in my life I've struggled with depression. Heck even today, I struggle with things related to my weight and my relationships like probably most people. At what point do I no longer have a right to have a gun?

Trucks/Cars/Bulldozers/Airplanes are critical for a functioning of modern society. Poisons/Explosives/Guns availability are not.

I've had the same POV for decades. People should be allowed to own guns, because in base form its in the Constitution. They can keep them in their home. They can keep them in their trunk. There should be clearly designated zones where people can shoot all they want. Warning signs and flags show any camping family of 4 that there is shooting going on and they can avoid it.

'The Constitution was made for the people, not the people for the Constitution.'
Theodore Roosevelt

Guy injured a few people. Same could happen with a gun. Nice try on pushing the agenda, but it didn't work.

Never. Show me a 15 minute 'rampage' with a gun that only resulted in injuries. You'll never find one.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Trucks/Cars/Bulldozers/Airplanes are critical for a functioning of modern society. Poisons/Explosives/Guns availability are not.

I favor more control, but this is simpleton logic. Cars have killed more people than guns, no matter how you categorize them as "critical" to functioning society.