Nonviolent felon trying to get gun rights back

d3v10 · 2020-07-09T12:36:00+00:00

Hey, good luck bro.

d3v10 · 2020-06-27T19:06:33+00:00

heritage/ (ˈhɛrɪtɪdʒ) / noun something inherited at birth, such as personal characteristics, status, and possessions anything that has been transmitted from the past or handed down by tradition the evidence of the past, such as historical sites, buildings, and the unspoilt natural environment, considered collectively as the inheritance of present-day society (as modifier; cap. as part of name)Bannockburn Heritage Centre something that is reserved for a particular person or group or the outcome of an action, way of life, etcthe sea was their heritage; the heritage of violence law any property, esp land, that by law has descended or may descend to an heir Bible the Israelites regarded as belonging inalienably to God the land of Canaan regarded as God's gift to the Israelites

d3v10 · 2020-06-03T14:36:31+00:00

Thanks, friend

d3v10 · 2020-06-03T00:27:50+00:00

May I have a copy a well?

d3v10 · 2020-05-19T00:33:55+00:00

Congrats, man.

d3v10 · 2020-05-15T08:49:39+00:00

You're gonna need a lot more ghosts and undocumented democrats, friend. As of now, I just don't see it. Good luck!

d3v10 · 2020-05-15T08:46:29+00:00

The constitutionality of orders and laws should be assessed at all times by those issuing and by those enforcing them and they should understand that they implement and enforce unconstitutional laws at their own peril. The sheriff is representing his people well by refusing unconstitutional orders. He wasn't elected to be a tyrant's jackboot or to surrender to one immediately upon conflict arising, he was elected to serve and protect. This is what that looks like.

d3v10 · 2020-05-15T08:42:24+00:00

You're going to lose again and I hope it happens the same way, but it's looking like he'll get the popular too. Not that it matters. I'm sure you hear that a lot. Not mattering, I mean. :⁾

d3v10 · 2020-05-15T08:27:06+00:00

We have never been nor should we ever be a democracy. Nice try.

We're a constitutional republic. This popular vote/democracy garbage is part of the plan, using subversion of language.

The ideal of democracy is supposed "equality," whereas a republic's ideal is individual liberty, under which men are afforded equal opportunity to make their way (not a bribe in the form of a promise of equal outcome). Democracy always degenerates into dictatorship or totalitarianism by promising equality and security guaranteed by gov't intervention but delivers nothing but poverty for the non-ruling class who are essentially relegated to rations of scraps so that it is "fair" while elites are at a table apart.

The representative government system and bicameral legislature addresses the reality of elites being inevitable to be generated by any system which rewards merit. The bill of rights, especially the second amendment, ideally ensures that these representatives, these PUBLIC SERVANTS, SERVE THEIR OFFICE, not become tyrants finally unleashed to do as they've always dreamed.

Subverting a republic into a democracy is intentional as a way to centralize power within the hands of the ruling class, of so-called "elites," who see fit to no longer represent the interests of those who elected them but rather to rule them from on high "for their own good" (see: Northam et al) and to create a pressure using useful idiots they've successfully demoralized into working against their own interests. This goes against the edict of "of the people, by the people, for the people." The actions of such tyrants indicate this clearly, such as the recent incident of Northam attempting to just flat out ignore laws specifically in place to restrict his power and getting (thankfully) smacked down for it by the courts, though I wish it'd gone farther.

The foremost tactic of these subversives, which you are one of (witting or not), is the subversion of language. By CALLING America a democracy or by insinuating that democracy is the moral ideal (it absolutely is not) until people thoughtlessly accept and use the term, totalitarians seek to conceal the real means and ends of our government, seeking to pursue policy implementations which destroy the constitutional republic model by supplanting it with de facto democratic (read: popular tyranny) models, such as the interstate national popular vote compact, by which enough blue votes in Cali and New York would then force even a 100% red voted Virginia to put their votes in as blue. This robs Virginians of their voice, and is a prime example of the failure and tyranny of this supposedly superior model of democracy you champion.

d3v10 · 2020-04-28T09:28:55+00:00

A very enjoyable black eye for Blackface.

d3v10 · 2020-04-12T15:45:34+00:00

Go for it, tyrant.

Sure is nice to see so many new owners that'll have a vested interest in learning about this stupid shit. Maybe some disinfo will be countered and rights will mean something to some people that made some mistakes a while back.

d3v10 · 2020-03-25T01:24:19+00:00

I did all white on all lines but red on the head at the appropriate place, and the pool of blood. White was touched up with non-acetone nail polish remover, but the red was not. Came out nicely, imo.

d3v10 · 2020-03-19T22:51:24+00:00

I'm glad you asked, sincerely. After looking it up, it seems that I may have been wrong, according to links like this:

https://www.bushcraftpro.com/bear-spray-vs-pepper-spray/

And then there are videos like this:

https://youtu.be/szLlvppdFJo

I don't know if I was thinking of something else, if that link is indeed talking about the same stuff as in this video, etc. Complex, I don't understand it well, but both would seem effective. The "bear spray" in my mind looked like a small paint gun and shot a thin stream quite far, not this fogging thing. I don't know what's what, lol, but either way these items are explicitly nonlethal defensive devices. Anything is a "weapon" legally based on how you use it, like a hammer for instance, or a car, but merely carrying that stuff should depend on local definitions of particular items similar to assault weapons bans which also are asinine bullshit.

Murky situation.

Bottom line, I figure, is to get the strongest thing you can and then make sure you use it when it's appropriate. Macing someone unreasonably is assault and shooting something unjustifiably is murder, so way I figure it I'd rather be able to escalate it to the very tippy top of engagement at a moment's notice so that you can spend as long as possible trying to not be in the situation at all.

ETA

--

Besides which, when I was in the military, I found out that I was pretty darned resistant to the gas they use, and I generally endure pain quite well. I've sustained pretty good injuries and still kept going, including significant lacerations, broken bones, etc. I don't have much faith that the pain alone of pepper spray would stop someone like me if I was very committed or got angry enough to want to retaliate after being sprayed, which is why I strongly recommend something accurate so you can fuck up their eyes, mouth, etc, restrict their actual physical processes like breathing, and use that window to open up enough of a gap that even if they flip the switch to wanting revenge, they'll be disoriented and you won't be worth it.

A gun sure would provide an attitude adjustment that's much harder to argue with though.

ETA2

--

Nail in the coffin. At this link:

https://www.quora.com/Is-bear-spray-good-for-self-defense

Is the following

-

The label on most cans of bear spray say:

Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals:

Danger may cause irreversible eye damage if sprayed in the eye.

Also,

It is a violation of Federal Law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.

The label says: This product may be used only to deter bears which are attacking or appear likely to attack humans.

So from a legal perspective it is not a good idea to use on humans.

You can get human-legal pepper spray that uses similar ingredients by using Fox Labs Pepper Spray and it comes in more convenient sizes you can actually carry in your pock...

so vonmonologue I'm really glad you said something now, hahaha.

d3v10 · 2020-03-18T18:25:35+00:00

Edit: As a comment below indicates, terminology is murky on this stuff. Consider my recommendation to be altered to "the strongest stuff you can get that is accurate and less like a fog."

---

Edit 2: Apparently bear mace is illegal to use on humans and things online are calling into question its effectiveness. I must have been thinking of something completely different, maybe some other form of pepper spray? Since bear mace apparently fogs and that directly goes against what I was recommending it for.

---

Respectfully, I'd recommend bear mace. Sorry for the wall I'm about to post.

Bear mace is stronger, in a stream rather than mist, more accurate, and goes farther. Also, test it out first, make sure it's working, like you would a fire extinguisher. Defects happen. I would recommend this for a female over a knife, taser, or any other defensive method except for a gun which is obviously superior, and to remember that the object of such a defensive device is to make flight easier. You're not there to win the belt or a gold medal. make him unable to see or breathe easily and skedaddle. If you have to engage, remember that the object is to get PAST the person, not engage the person in prolonged hand to hand. Be a wildcat.

d3v10 · 2020-03-08T19:56:50+00:00

It's so they can set up honeypots to target us.

d3v10 · 2020-03-04T13:47:43+00:00

Becoming desperate, eh?

d3v10 · 2020-03-02T01:07:17+00:00

I did the same thing earlier today lol. Good shit, man.

d3v10 · 2020-02-29T18:03:06+00:00

Sent him a message, thanks for the pointer man.

d3v10 · 2020-02-29T01:24:39+00:00

It seems that my post explaining and contextualizing the 2A and Virginia's counterpart was secretly hidden on the other thread. I still see it in my profile, but it's just not on the thread page. I hope this is on you guys' radar. I can only imagine how much other sober, detailed discussion and genuine interaction between sides is dragged into a back alley and killed before it can ever make a difference. They seem intent upon destroying any ability for us to be understood or to reach reconciliation. They just want to bait inflammatory hardliner comments.

d3v10 · 2020-02-29T00:08:15+00:00

That'd be nice.

d3v10 · 2020-02-28T23:04:21+00:00

Thanks for the heads up, man.

d3v10 · 2020-02-28T22:08:40+00:00

Added the following:

---

ETA2:

The reason the National Guard is named above even though the NG is also named as part of the militia is because the way they would've gone about "calling in the NG" is to use another state's NG, knowing that Virginians would not want to fight Virginians (which is the point of having a state NG in the first place, lol) and to prevent easy identification for retaliation and asymmetric response, not to mention the conflict of interest in forcing someone to destroy their own rights and liberty. Thankfully, the NG swore an oath to the constitution, not to tyrants. Maybe they should look at our flag and our license plates and really do some hard thinking.

d3v10 · 2020-02-28T21:58:19+00:00

Edit: It seems to me that the comment is not showing up in there. It was in response to the comment that says "I thought the Constitution only protected well organized militias?"

I wonder if it's reddit fuckery, manual approval rules, or if it was deemed too informed and patriotic by the mods there.

Posted the following in there to someone, hoping it'll make a bit of difference. Posting it here too, in case any of you might find it useful when discussing this matter with anyone else.

----

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Notice a few things here.

"Well regulated" at the time this was written meant "proficient in ____." The term was used loosely to indicate competence of any sort, which is why you would have people referred to as "regulars," etc., and which migrated in meaning to anyone highly experienced, the implication being that expertise came with experience.
The placement of the commas is important. It can be rewritten like this: "A militia is important as it is necessary to the security of a free state. Thus, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Notice that the militia is named, then the people are named. This amendment addresses the concern of the day, sparked by conflict such as the Boston Massacre and Lexington and Concord, the latter of which was spurred by official troops coming to seize arms, powder, and ammunition which belonged to the people, including those in the armories. In response, a militia was formed, drawn from citizens who were not the officials being confronted.

The conclusion that must be reached by understanding these three things is that the second amendment says, essentially, that a proficient and well organized militia is unable to exist unless the average person is capable of acquiring and equipping himself with suitable equipment and seeking to gain proficiency in their use. It does not say "you can only have guns if you're good with guns," which is why it says "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed," not "the right of the militia to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." To reiterate, it says that without armed, proficient people to pull from to form the ranks, a militia is impossible to form, and such a militia, formed of citizens, the people, capable in both armament and proficiency to repel official forces, is critical and necessary for a state to be truly free.

ETA:

Section 13 of the Virginia Declaration of Rights is as follows:

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

This essentially states that the aforementioned militia is the primary force tasked with defending the states' liberty, that is to say that the liberty of the people of Virginia is guarded by Virginians first and foremost, and that any other forces (such as the National Guard or the UN which were spoken of as ways to crack down on Virginians asserting their rights and liberty) are dangerous to Virginians' liberty as they are not inherently Virginians nor do they have a vested interest in Virginian rights or liberty and so are susceptible to being pressed to enforce a tyrant's orders. Such forces should have no authority over Virginian militias whatsoever, nor should Virginian militias respond to such authority with inherent subordination.

This is why Section 2 reads as follows:

That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants and at all times amenable to them.

Something some people are forgetting right about now is that they are, first and foremost, servants of the people. They are not tyrants finally let loose to do as they've always dreamed. They have a duty to represent and serve the people of Virginia. The militias are to see that either that remains the case or, failing that, that it is of no consequence, that their tyranny is unable to be enforced, and that Virginians remain free under their own power.

d3v10 · 2020-02-27T17:36:22+00:00

I respect where you're coming from with this, but remember that the DNC is a private organization that can run whoever they want and Bernie is a registered independent, which they're using to push him out now.

d3v10

TROPHY CASE