I'm sorry the 100 mile rule isn't authorized in the constitution. Now I'm not one to hide behind the constitution and say that the parchment is what protects me. What I am suggesting is people who work around the 4th, 5th amendments should understand that those are the amendments that protect THEM. If they don't live up to their end of the bargain to respect my inherent rights I reserve the right to shoot them in the mother fucking face.Posted by Chris at January 20, 2015 10:58 AM
OK Chas, that takes care of Thursday and Friday. What do you think they'll work up for the weekend?
And Chris, you better have a flat shooting piece and be able to hit something out to 400-500 meters. Every troop in the service had to shoot at that range on popups to quality way back when. Head shots best, they don't armor cheeks and throats.
If you're squeamish about putting one in somebody's eyeball, don't worry about it. They'll do you and it will be over and you won't have to worry.Posted by Vermont Woodchuck at January 20, 2015 12:00 PM
When a person takes on the job to assault me in any way their gov't costume and credentials will not save their life.
Everybody wants to yap about the big picture while I focus on the small one. The asshole that will accost me. THAT is where I will stand for my natural rights.
You cannot hold the thought of assaulting others AND the desire to go home safe at night at the same time. One idea must overcome the other and it up to the thinker to decide which is more important and run with it.
2 in the head 1 in the sternumPosted by ghostsniper at January 20, 2015 1:35 PM
If the ACLU hadn't spent THE LAST 5 DECADES
pushing anti-American, anti-American-culture,
pro-homosexual, pro-illegal alien GARBAGE on the rest of us,
I might care.
As is, I'm prepard to respond as appropriate...
...including if an ACLUer is within distance.
Don't extrapolate from your cowardice what I won't do. This isn't going a stand and deliver war. You might want to read your Boyd and Robb. I love how you also assume all uniforms will be facing only one direction.
You may be willing to fight this war to the 9 millionth guy who thinks like me (that's three percent of the population) but are you willing and more precisely are your masters willing to fight to the 12th congressman? The 5th governor? The 1599 dead IRS agent?Posted by Chris at January 20, 2015 5:56 PM
This has gone on for years. I've lived along the border for my entire life, and I've never heard about it being abused.Posted by Bradoplata at January 20, 2015 6:57 PM
A police friend of mine told me it is worse than this map, the law can be interpreted to mean that 100 miles applies to most airports as they are considered "ports", ie: here in Columbus Ohio there is a big sign at the airport about the "port authority" who runs the snow.. thus draw 100 mile circles around all large airports and you see there is literally no free zones.Posted by checkers at January 20, 2015 8:59 PM
As the title indicates military and law enforcement activities within this zone are above reproach using the Constitution for a defense.
Since when in the last six years has the Constitution been of any use to any of us? Executive Orders and the potential for declaring Martial Law are in the hands of the POTUS. God help us.
We are talking about actual infringements of our freedoms by Border Patrol running along I-8 and I-10 from Texas to San Diego.
We are also talking about the potential for more enforcement of laws set up for military zones and UN-influenced international boundaries.
“The people in power will not disappear voluntarily.” BurroughsPosted by chasmatic at January 20, 2015 9:51 PM
Chasmatic, Did you set the school record with that jump? ;-)Posted by Bradoplata at January 20, 2015 10:37 PM
Chris, you have no idea what I have already done. Cowardice? I think not.Posted by Vermont Woodchuck at January 21, 2015 3:19 AM
My dick is hard, my powder is dry, my eye is clear and I'm not the least bit afraid.Posted by Jack at January 21, 2015 7:43 AM
Bradoplata: kinda cryptic, please spell it out for me. I'm not quite as clever as you.
I live in Borderland, down in New Mexico about thirty miles north of the line.
I haven't seen any oppressive enforcement around me or in my small town and surrounding areas of NM.
I've travelled along I-10 and I-8 east and west and have not experienced any troubles.
This article was posted as a warning: the feds can come down hard on us and we have no protection under the law. We might also consider the possibility that UN troops could be called in to fortify our borders, although as leaky as they are, why bother? What cannot be ignored is the fact that DC can put laws in action that will strip us of even more of our freedom.
The nature of the ACLU is such that one would expect them to be in favor of more restrictions. A warning coming from them taking this stand is valid in my opinion.
Under what conditions, independent of the federal government, is the governor of a state authorized to activate his National Guard to protect his state's citizenry? Can his Legislature countermand his activation order?Posted by Howard Nelson at January 21, 2015 10:12 AM
If we want examples of what the feds are capable of, look at Katrina, Waco, even that Bundy dog & pony show.
when we hear the sound of choppers coming in or boots on the ground in our very own apple-pie-blue-skies Kristallnacht then we will get the idea.
The way they locked down Boston, nobody asked permission or gave fair warning. BAM, there it was.
I think you made a logic error in your text.
"The nature of the ACLU is such that one would expect them to be in favor of more restrictions."
You must mean "The nature of the ACLU is such that one would expect them to be in favor of LESS restrictions."
The ACLU is known to want LESS restrictions on our personal rights.
(with the exception of, perhaps, certain kinds of gun control.)
Sorry, my message above is replying to chasmatic not Jack.Posted by Scott Thomas at January 23, 2015 1:02 PM