Hate Crime

This country is done. It’s a hate crime to tear down the Fag Flag, but not to tear down the American one.

Hypocrite on the Right

Yesterday, I posted about this woman, who said that her “fellow conservatives” need Jesus because we argue with and threaten the left?

We don’t have to have a kumbaya moment, but some of yall show your true colors quicker than you think when it comes to wishing harm to the opposition… Yall need Jesus.

I will point out that I was pointing out the errors in her statement. She responded with:

Omg once again, we are discussing liberal posters on X. You got a thick skull with jack shit inside it bruh. And you are full of fear.

Who needs Jesus? Stupid cunt.

Here is the quote:

Excusing the Enemy

This woman is insisting that we, as the targets of the left who wants us either dead or in camps, must wait until they take overt actions to carry out their threats before we openly call for their elimination.

As I pointed out to her in the thread- when the other side is telling you that:

Still, she insists that we wait for “everyday people” to take action, and refers to the people out there openly calling for violence against us as “loudmouths” who don’t really mean it. Then she blocked me because I was “annoying”, despite the fact that I produced examples of those who are openly calling for genocide against Trump supporters.

Her position that you must wait for some sort of attempt to carry out a vocalized threat before defending yourself doesn’t work on an individual level and certainly doesn’t work at a national level. I don’t have to, and should not, wait for a person who tells me that they are going to shoot me while holding a gun to fire the first shot. I also shouldn’t wait for the people loudly screaming that they want me dead or in a camp to actually begin loading the boxcars before I call for active resistance.

The story, if it happened today

BREAKING NEWS: Seventy-Two Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation In Massachusetts. National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction.

Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw. Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement, which has been blamed for a number of terrorist acts, including the destruction of valuable cargo that had been located on ships in the Boston harbor.

Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals and cowards” issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s efforts to secure law and order.

The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons after Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week.

This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms. One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.”

Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government’s plans.

During a tense standoff in the Lexington town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists. Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange. Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths.

Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat. Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops.

Some members of the Congressional Democrat leadership have called for the Governor to bring the full might of the military against the citizens in the area, up to and including aircraft and drone strikes on neighborhoods.

Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders” of the extremist faction, remain at large.

My Florida Opinion

JKB over at GunFreeZone asks if it would be legal to shoot if this were to happen in [your state]. Here is my opinion on how Florida law would handle this:


At the beginning of the video, the three in it were committing a felony (grand larceny) as well as trespassing. You cannot use deadly force to protect property. However, as soon as they saw that the homeowner was there, they threatened to shoot him if he came out of his house. That immediately raises the offence to carjacking, which Florida law 812.133 defines thusly:

“Carjacking” means the taking of a motor vehicle which may be the subject of larceny from the person or custody of another, with intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive the person or the owner of the motor vehicle, when in the course of the taking there is the use of force, violence, assault, or putting in fear.

It also constitutes robbery with a firearm, 812.13 (a first degree felony)

“Robbery” means the taking of money or other property which may be the subject of larceny from the person or custody of another, with intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive the person or the owner of the money or other property, when in the course of the taking there is the use of force, violence, assault, or putting in fear.

The felons here are shouting that they have a gun and are willing to kill you to take the car. That creates another felony, aggravated assault 784.021:

(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:

(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or

(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

Since both felonies use the threat of force, they are forcible felonies. A forcible felony is defined in Florida 776.08 as:

“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

emphais added

So what can you do about stopping a forcible felony? Florida 776.031 explains that:

A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

So in Florida, you would be legally justified in shooting all of them.

The Real Crime

Below, you will see the deposition of a Brevard County Deputy who arrested a man for trespassing and obstruction. The man was in a parking lot, filming a cop who was on a road 35 feet away, conducting a traffic stop. The officer here being deposed arrived on the scene and told the man that he was being trespassed, ordered him to get in his vehicle and leave.

The man walked away, and immediately left the property. He was arrested for trespassing and obstruction. The law of trespassing is where a person refuses to leave private property after being told to leave. It says nothing of leaving your vehicle and wife behind. The cop even admits that leaving your vehicle behind isn’t a crime, but leaving it behind after a cop orders you not to, is.

The case here is one that is literally “respect mah authoritay” when the man didn’t do exactly as the cop told him to, the law be damned.

It is long past time for police to lose qualified immunity.