Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

jbravo_123 · 03-14-2013, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Violence is not the answer. We need a non-violent, peaceful revolution, based on CIVIL disobedience. Thinking that you can take up arms against the government and be successful is ridiculous. It will only give them the excuse they need to shoot back. And they have a hell of a lot more firepower.

Peaceful, non-violent resistance is the only way to secure real change.

Agreed. At this point in time, thinking that your little bunker can somehow stand up to the might of the American military is just plain foolish.

If the government (city, state, federal, whatever) really wants to come after you, there's not going to be much you can do about it with firearms.

In short, I agree that if there's going to be any change, violent means aren't going to be the way to do it.

JD Barleycorn · 03-14-2013, 11:30 AM

The point about the "bunker" as you call it is an Ad Hominem attack. A safe point (more accurate) is designed to be a place to safely store supplies, weapons, and provide a rally point for any emergency. Whether that emergency is a natural disastor, insurrection, or a government crackdown. Most safety is from the fact that safe points are not that obvious or camoflauged. Can you argue with the logic of having a safe place to go with supplies that may have to last a few months?

As to standing up to the military; I don't think anyone has ever said something like that (but you) but if the government went after them it would make a noise that would be heard by many (by noise, I'm talking a metaphor and not actual noise)

Guest032516 · 03-14-2013, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timpage

Fuck you. Fuck you, too. I tire of your know it all attitude. Then you need to get in better shape. You totally miss the point about half the time because you're so busy trying to show everybody how smart you think you are. Back up and think every once in awhile.

I don't think I missed the point at all. I think you and the LA Times did. People are more vocal than ever thanks to the Internet. That means a lot of dumb shits who never would have gotten their opinions published before are now able to vent their spleen.

But the very act of venting their spleen also servers as a release valve. If it didn't, we would already have waves of violence by these so-called hate groups.

The SPLC warns us about the increase in the number of "groups" (1000s of them) that are supposedly a threat to us. But how many of these "groups" are lone nutters posting blogs in their basement and posting comments on the blogs of other lone nutters? I'd say the vast majority of them.

CJ7 · 03-14-2013, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExNYer

I don't think I missed the point at all. I think you and the LA Times did. People are more vocal than ever thanks to the Internet. That means a lot of dumb shits who never would have gotten their opinions published before are now able to vent their spleen.

But the very act of venting their spleen also servers as a release valve. If it didn't, we would already have waves of violence by these so-called hate groups.

The SPLC warns us about the increase in the number of "groups" (1000s of them) that are supposedly a threat to us. But how many of these "groups" are lone nutters posting blogs in their basement and posting comments on the blogs of other lone nutters? I'd say the vast majority of them.

" lone nutters posting blogs in their basement and posting comments on the blogs of other lone nutters"

damn if that doesnt fit COF like a glove ..

jbravo_123 · 03-14-2013, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The point about the "bunker" as you call it is an Ad Hominem attack. A safe point (more accurate) is designed to be a place to safely store supplies, weapons, and provide a rally point for any emergency. Whether that emergency is a natural disastor, insurrection, or a government crackdown. Most safety is from the fact that safe points are not that obvious or camoflauged. Can you argue with the logic of having a safe place to go with supplies that may have to last a few months?

Well, the argument against that is to not spend the time and effort into something that won't happen. The hardcore preppers don't spend an inconsequential amount of time and money into their safe holes. Also, the ones that tend to gain media attention aren't ones that are preparing for natural disasters (which usually take different types of preparation), but are ones prepping for social collapse or government crackdown.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

As to standing up to the military; I don't think anyone has ever said something like that (but you) but if the government went after them it would make a noise that would be heard by many (by noise, I'm talking a metaphor and not actual noise)

You really don't think that many of these groups that espouse their hatred for the government aren't preparing for some sort of showdown with it (regardless of whether the government is really preparing for a crackdown on them or not)? I agree though that one of the biggest factor keeping the government from going after those types of groups is the media attention / noise it would bring along with it.

CJ7 · 03-14-2013, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbravo_123

Well, the argument against that is to not spend the time and effort into something that won't happen. The hardcore preppers don't spend an inconsequential amount of time and money into their safe holes. Also, the ones that tend to gain media attention aren't ones that are preparing for natural disasters (which usually take different types of preparation), but are ones prepping for social collapse or government crackdown.

You really don't think that many of these groups that espouse their hatred for the government aren't preparing for some sort of showdown with it (regardless of whether the government is really preparing for a crackdown on them or not)? I agree though that one of the biggest factor keeping the government from going after those types of groups is the media attention / noise it would bring along with it.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/1...ce-starvation/

jbravo_123 · 03-14-2013, 02:29 PM

Yeah, when we have to stop paying farmers to not grow food, maybe I'll start looking at our food stores more closely...

acp5762 · 03-14-2013, 02:47 PM

Iam not so much worried about using force against the Government as Iam against rogue civilians freaking out for some reason or another. Iam not much into the " Bunker" issues either. If the idea is to survive a Nuclear event, it's really not worth surviving such a thing anyway. I say pick your battles wisely.

Sandsailor · 03-14-2013, 03:11 PM

Thought all the militia stuff evaporated after the Alfred P. Murrah building in OKC was bombed. Then the WTC and attention was turned offshore. USA has had its share of armed rebellions over the years and I can't recall one that lasted beyond a skirmish.

Munchmasterman · 03-14-2013, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LovingKayla

When the shit hits the fan (and it will) you're going to be surprised how quickly you make friends with one of those evil tea party preppers because they're the only ones with a stash of food and ammo.

So you think preppers are going to share ammo and food?

You must be high. You show up at their place and they'll give you a part of their ammo. The front third of as many rounds as it takes.

I loved the editorials that came out after Sandy came through. Saying how misunderstood and unfairly maligned the preppers were. They would have helped if they were needed.

What a load of shit. At some level these people hope there is a total break down.

Because, just like you Kayla, they want to say "I told you so".

satexasguy · 03-14-2013, 03:25 PM

should we worry about this too? http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...-panther-party

Guest032516 · 03-14-2013, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ7

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/1...ce-starvation/

How/Why did that article even make it onto the SPLC website?

It's Glenn Beck's dumb speculation about hyper-inflation causing food shortages (back in 2010, no less).

It might be stupid, doomsday predictions, but things like that have been around forever. How does it qualify as "hate speech"? Is hating hyper-inflation and economic collapse a bad thing?

People have also panicked/predicted doomsday over the Y2K bug, flu epidemics, tax cuts, tax increases, welfare reform, the Reagan military buildup, and a whole shit load of other things I am forgetting. Does SPLC issue hate-speech warnings over all of those things, too?

IIFFOFRDB · 03-14-2013, 07:19 PM

1.6 reasons to...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2xk97ETIT4

Jewish Lawyer · 03-14-2013, 09:36 PM

The reason the government has such good statistics on those hate groups is because they have infiltrated everyone of them. They (them evil hater boys) can't fart without it being smelled by the NSA, FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, CIA, Texas Rangers, Forest Rangers, US Marshal's, DEA, and the Secret Service. The number of people in the hate groups is.........insignificant..haha hah! More people commit voting fraud than join those groups! (You knew I was gonna say it)
The only reason we periodically hear about it is the well connected SPLC and the ultra fat hideous Heidi Beirich get 'ahem' ..fed info from the government whenever they want to raise a fuss, and the media knows to report it all to stay on the good side of his Royal Highness, The Defender of the Faith and all that is Good, Keeper of the Realm, Mr President Barack Hussien Sotero Obama, Esq.

CuteOldGuy · 03-14-2013, 09:39 PM

To me, it doesn't make sense to hoard food or ammo. When the collapse comes, if you have food, you will become very popular, and eventually you will run out of ammo. It's not worth it. I want to stay under the radar, or die in the resistance. First thing I would do is get to where my grandkids are, then whatever happens, happens.