Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32002485
... Quoting: Resister
That is not what he did and you know it. He wasn't warning people about being able to defend himself, he was threatening offence. Totally different.
Normally, I agree with you, friend. I like a lot of your posts, and consider you a good guy.
But here, what I saw, was a guy who is REACTING to offense. I consider anyone who threatens the constitution and Bill of rights to be traitors, oath violators, and offenders.
Personally, I wouldn't have done what this guy did. But for him to now have his rights taken away is outrageous. Warning people to leave his rights alone is not illegal, or immoral.
There's an old saying... "Those who are not willing to defend their freedom, do not deserve their freedom."
That is absolutely true. He was reacting and our freedoms are under attack. So far though, with very few exceptions, federal troops are not knocking down our doors to take our guns. When that happens, we should defend ourselves but that isnít happening yet. Maybe I'm wrong, but I didnít hear someone in defense mode. I heard someone who was about ready to open up a military level can of homicide.
Here is another old saying. Loose lips sink ships.
The people at the first Boston Tea Party in MA would never have gotten near that boat if they put up giant signs about it all across town first. It is also worth noting that the only thing they spilled that day was tea. The founding fathers boldly stood for their rights to freedom, but their warning to any attackers was just that, a warning. They didnít tell King George that they were going to come after him. They warned ďDonít Tread On MeĒ. Donítí come here to my house to take what is mine. He seemed to be saying he was not going to wait, but was going to strike first and it wasnít going to just be tea.
As far as his rights being taken away, he still has the right to have his guns and in TN, you can have long guns with you without a permit so long as they are not loaded. I know. It's not as good as the U.S. second amendment but the TN state constitution says that "the people have the right to keep and bear arms, but that the legislature shall have the authority to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime" and the state law requires a permit that is really easy to get. I don't like it, but it is what we have had to work with here for a long time and he would not have been issued a permit in the first place if he had been convicted of a felony or violent domestic crime. What he did is credibly self-flag himself as someone who might not qualify for that permit in the very near future.
That guy trains people how to use their weapons for a living. That's all well and good, but it makes what he says about using those weapons credible. That also made his open threat a credible one. He should have known better than to levy that kind of offensive sounding threat on the World Wide Web. Maybe he meant to say he would be forced to kill people only in self-defense, but that isnít what he said and we arenít at war here. He didnít offer that qualification and TN revoked his permit because of it. Maybe if he can show that he did not intend to convey a first strike homicidal offense he will get his permit back, but I wouldnít hold my breath waiting for that to happen.
I am the king of my little bitty castle and I will defend it. I will defend my right to keep and bear arms against whomever up to and including an unjust unconstitutional tyrannical government, but that is only going to be defense until some form of war is declared even unofficially and that hasnít happened yet and that is why he has lost his carry permit in TN.