Allow me to be clear

It has been my personal experience that the guys who are always talking about “revolution”, and “shooting the bastards” are as we used to say all talk and no walk, meaning that if it every actually came to shooting, they’d be too chickenshit/fat ‘n lazy to actually take up arms.



  1. This is one of those areas where it gets difficult to implement the “all gun owners need to stick together” principle.

    Those of us who consider ourselves to be the more rational and practical advocates of gun rights think that the “panic button” folks are hurting our cause by scaring away folks from embracing the normality of the way we lead our lives (i.e., with guns).

    On the other hand, the more vocal and strident “shall not be infringed” crowd think we’re abandoning them like rats from a sinking ship, not unlike the so-called Fudds who think bolt-action .30-06s are just fine, but nobody needs an EBR.

    I’m not so sure we can just say “we all need to stick together and support each other” and have it work out on this issue.

  2. Well, he’s determined that voting isn’t going to fix things; that it’s only going to get better through violent revolution…

    …and he’s typing on the interwebz. Who does he think is going to go start his Freedom Rebellion for him?

  3. Kurt – I like you, so I’m going to be straight with you. I said “my experience” has been “x”; that means that I’ve done this dance before with people, and it has without fail fallen within the parameters I laid out above. If Mike is in fact ready to start shooting people, then why hasn’t he? I’m serious – if the situation is as bad as Mike et al say it is, then the time to start shooting motherfuckers is right now, so sac up and start.

  4. I think Mr. Vanderboegh is trying to avert the necessity of shooting, by giving fair warning that further infringements could bring about such an ugly outcome.

    I respect everyone involved in the debate, but it’s a debate that I think has gotten a lot more rancorous than is either necessary or helpful.

  5. I agree, it’s gotten kind of acrimonious, and I’m at part to blame for that. I tend to take it personally when people start talking about shooting cops, because they’re literally talking about shooting at my (formerly me) and my family.

  6. The conversation has jumped the shark a little bit. It appears that those of us who are working peacefully within the system are apparently delusional modern day tories or something similar.
    At least that is the gist of the message I’m getting from our more radical friends in that running commentary.
    Kurt, as to your question, I don’t know. I don’t know the man at all outside of his writings. He could be 100% sincere for all I know.
    I do know that no volunteer milita group led by Mr. Vanderboegh or anyone else has come to the armed defense of Olafson or anyone else they consider unjust victims of our government.

  7. I don’t think anyone is talking about “shooting cops” in general, but rather warning that whatever agent comes to register or take guns will be defended against. I hope there are some true Americans among the law enforcement community who will refuse to enact the tyrannical plans, and support their freedom-loving fellow citizens.

    Cops like cowtowncop and secondcitycop give me a lot of hope.

  8. Flip side is anyone who kicks in my door will be assumed criminal and killed. The problem is the urban cops in my town love getting ninja’ed-up and kicking in citizens’ doors. The pretend it’s brave to throw grenades, blow down doors, and raid with full-auto against pot smokers. I believe they call all that nonsense “putting their life on the line.”

    Those LEOs I’m afraid, will welcome the opportunity to attack more citizens unless we warn them as Mike V. did that they will be put down.

  9. “I tend to take it personally when people start talking about shooting cops, because they’re literally talking about shooting at my (formerly me) and my family.”

    Then it’s time for you to get busy. It wasn’t that long ago that even shooting at, much less hitting a police officer was unthinkable. Whether it’s called the Thin Blue Line, or whatever, there’s been an increase in the Us Versus Them mentality amongst LEOs. When that attitude was directed at felons and other known criminals, nobody said anything, because nobody likes bad guys. Over the last fifteen or so years however, that way of thinking has been increasingly directed at anyone who is not a member of the Department. Respect cannot be demanded, but only earned, and every time a cop runs roughshod over a citizen and nothing happens, or some face-saving ‘administrative leave’ is applied, the respect your grandfathers and fathers worked so hard to achieve erodes. And with the internet, these stories circulate far outside the jurisdiction in which the offense occurred. For every story like the LT who got fired because he didn’t get free lattes from Starbucks and threatened to delay response times, there are what, ten?, twenty? stories of officers seemingly getting away with behavior that would definitely get an Ordinary Joe tossed into the pokey. Field sobriety tests not administered, prosecutors ‘decining’ to press charges, the whole thing. And taking care of something ‘in house’ isn’t the answer either. Some PO does something stupid, and gets assigned to foot patrol over in Armpitsville for his trouble, what do We The People see? The guy still has a job, a sidearm, and the power of arrest. Being given a lousy assignment instead of doing time for the same offense that a citizen would do time for isn’t any sort of punishment at all.
    And here’s a story from today: a kid shoots a bean through a straw at someone and gets arrested for it. A kid, non compos mensa and all. As the potential of jail increases from any contact with an LEO, the more likely someone will decide ‘what the hell do I have to lose here, anyway’.
    And if you want to respond with ‘hey we only enforce the law, you don’t like it, run for office’ tell me when the last time that a PBA president or a Chief of Police went up to the Legislature and told the nitwits ‘forget it, you want to pass that, you put on a uniform and enforce it yourselves’.
    I’m not suggesting that society hasn’t changed, because it has, but so have the police, and so long as citizens are treated as they were a potential candidate for someone’s arrest sheet first and a member of society second or third, this erosion of respect for a vital part of our country will continue.

    You’re not the problem, Caleb. And not because you’re retired: I forget when I started reading your blog, and you’ve always struck me as a Thoroughly Decent Guy, such that I cannot imagine you getting badge heavy on someone who didn’t deserve it. Unfortunately, all police officers aren’t you.

  10. The attitudes of us vs. them with the police are accelerating with the continuing SWAT implementation. The WOT did not help with a lot of equipment going to police departments. With all those toys the temptation to use them is nigh irresistible.

    I think the war on drugs dating from the Reagan time and the forfeiture laws are the starting point. Another case of the law of unintended consequences. The debilitating effects of crack and heroin on society and individuals and their families is obvious and we wanted to reduce those effects.

    However the tactics to stop them increased police powers and the society response was for increase drug testing. To the point the Supreme Court said it was ok to test students without probable cause. Now every employer does the same thing and we have given not the just the government but private business the authority to test us at will. That is a real infringement on our liberty. The no knock raids have been a problem, yet they were upheld. Now we have a case of a 90-year-old woman in Atlanta murdered by cops in a no knock raid and the police planted evidence and killed a woman because of bad information or a need to increase their arrests so they could get promotions. In Virginia a police officer was killed on a no knock raid on a quiet man that had a garden and since the man had a break in the previous week, he shot and killed the police officer. The marijuana found was miniscule. The break in was the informer that the raid was based on. Now an officer is dead and his family is missing a father and another man is in jail for murder. The tragedy was so unnecessary. The man was not a danger to society, the worst offense he had was a traffic ticket.

    Liberties are slowly nibbled away due to unrest in society. The police of course feel it is we vs. them because they are charged with enforcing these laws that we as citizens allowed our representatives to create in the hope that it will keep a stable and peaceful society. The more laws there are, the increasing chance that we have in breaking them. The increasing felonizing of crimes is also a problem. Felonies used to be for serious crimes like rape and murder.

    I would really regret if Kurt had a no knock raid on his home in Illinois because he shouted on the Internet his plans to out a pistol grip on his Beowulf 50. And Kurt feeling frustrated and influenced from others decided he needed to prove his courage and offer armed resistance. I do not want to use his tragic death to try and legislate a change. I would rather he stay alive and posting about Illinois so we can slowly change the laws and social attitudes.

    That is why that many of us are sensitive to being portrayed as lunatics that will increase civil unrest like many commenters has recently promoted. WE do not want an excuse for more liberties to be taken away.

Comments are closed.