Home » Blogs » Quote of the Day: American Revolution 2.0 Edition

Quote of the Day: American Revolution 2.0 Edition

Robert Farago - comments No comments

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke (courtesy gopusa.com)

“To me [gun confiscation] would be an act of tyranny. So the people in Milwaukee County do not have to worry about me enforcing some sort of order that goes out and collects everybody’s handgun, or rifles, or any kind of firearm and makes them turn them in. The reason is I don’t want to get shot, because I believe that if somebody tried to enforce something of that magnitude, you would see the second coming of an American revolution, the likes of which would make the first revolution pale by comparison.” – Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke [via libertycrier.com] [h/t RG]

0 thoughts on “Quote of the Day: American Revolution 2.0 Edition”

  1. “…I stand with moms across the country and ask that Facebook and Instagram join Craigslist, Google and eBay and prohibit unlicensed gun sales.”

    Congratulations you, Facebook doesn’t sell guns at all, licensed or otherwise.

    In other news, a man climbs a mountain and claims to be very high and a women goes swimming and claims she is wet.

    Reply
  2. Quote is from about a year ago but still relevant.

    What was better were his radio commericals where he asked honest citizens to get their carry permits and help the local po po out by being their own 911.

    Reply
      • Here here! The tyranny we face today is far far worse than what the founders faced. They were being taxed something like 3% overall. My last paycheck had 27% taken out of it for income Medicare and social security(I am 24 and I will never see that money back). I do pretty well, but I am not rich by any means. I guess I am being unrealistic though, because the government obviously earned that chunk of my paycheck, not me.

        Reply
  3. I have to comment to ZM 1306 – I would say become a police officer only if you have a really burning desire. It’s too difficult a job to take on with half a heart.

    To the rest of the blog I say: When stopped by the police, don’t get out of your car unless they order you out at which point come out empty hands first. Don’t reach into your pockets, go into glove compartments or reach under the seat when an officer approaches, and certainly don’t go into your trunk, truck bed or rear door after exiting you vehicle. Consider that the officer may have had several hot calls over the last few tours and might just be expecting the worst.

    Reply
  4. “…. a flag-raiser for gun safety advocates.”

    Oh, they’re “gun safety advocates” now?

    What, exactly, do they do to promote gun safety? Do they sponsor Eddie Eagle training classes for children? Do they offer basic firearms home safety classes for adults? Do they distribute trigger locks FREE to anyone who asks for one?

    No, that would be the NRA and NSSF who do those things. These mothers and mayors are anti-Freedom, anti-Civil Rights, and imho, anti-American.

    Reply
  5. I don’t think the people (well, person) scoffing at the likelihood of death/’armed revolution’ should house to house confiscations begin is even remotely aware of realities on the ground.

    These no-knock raids are inherently dangerous even when they are attempted in situations where the target is unaware he’s the subject of the raid. CATO’s got a botched raid map here (http://www.cato.org/raidmap) that depicts this. Add in the complete loss of surprise after the first ten or so (tops) of these are done, where pretty much every gun owner in the state would know he’s on a list within hours of the first raid being attempted, and you’ve ratcheted up the danger factor by an exponential amount.

    Do not think for one second that the very instant after the first gun confiscation death occurred, be it citizen or officer, that the dynamic of those raids wouldn’t change tremendously… and there is literally no chance that someone wouldn’t end up shot and killed in one of these things within the first couple weeks (again, tops).

    This ‘armed revolution’ isn’t about citizen militias taking over towns like they have in Mexico. An ‘armed revolution’ doesn’t have to be 10,000 people in brand new digital camo outfits running around with shiny ARs. An ‘armed revolution’ doesn’t even have to fire a shot. All it has to do is to be armed, stand up, and say ‘No.’

    This administration won’t even enforce a health care law that makes people pay more money to get inferior health care because of the bad optics politically. Does anybody think for one second they’d allow gun owners to be killed or arrested and deal with the political optics of that? Give me a break.

    The ‘armed revolution’ is going to be people standing up and saying ‘bleep you’ to police officers, something awful eventually happening, and then a whole bunch of career politicians running for the bleeping hills because they aren’t going to want the first half a percent of the sheer tonnage of public hatred that will descend on them the first hours after something like this:

    “John Smith, father of two, was shot and killed during a no-knock raid performed at 11pm at his house in Localtown, Connecticut. Police refused comment on the incident at this time, but neighbors reported a CT swat team arrived at the Smith’s front lawn late Wednesday evening, and after quickly entering the establishment they heard gunfire shortly thereafter. Reports vary at this point with some witnesses alleging ‘more than a couple dozen’ rounds were fired. Although Mr. Smith is the only reported casualty at this time, witnesses say that two ambulances left the scene and that one of them transported Mr. Smith’s oldest daughter, Jane Smith, age 11.

    … happens. That’s a completely made up (by me) news report, and I defy you to read that and not feel real fear. You know that not only COULD that happen just as I (again, fictionally) laid out, but that it damn sure well would. Somebody would screw up.

    That’s what the ‘armed revolution’ will look like.

    Reply
    • “This administration won’t even enforce a health care law that makes people pay more money to get inferior health care because of the bad optics politically. Does anybody think for one second they’d allow gun owners to be killed or arrested and deal with the political optics of that?”

      Yes.

      President Obama clearly believes the health care law is a cornerstone of his legacy and will do whatever it takes to protect and extend it.

      If he, and by extension his administration, view gun control in the same fashion, then … yes. They would be willing to kill gun owners for the sake of that legacy, if that’s what it took to make it happen. Or at least that’s my perception, and I hope I’m wrong and/or that there’s not enough time left for this administration to really get it going.

      Reply
    • I get what you are saying, and word will spread fast among gun owners, but don’t expect those first media reports to paint John Smith as suburban family man. He’ll be an armed insurrectionist or terrorist upon first reports but hopefully the people who are paying attention will see through that.

      Reply
  6. So now we have Top Cops in Detroit and Milwaukee encouraging citizens to get their CC license or permits. Could this be a new trend? The fact that both men are black and know that the poor are the most vulnerable to bad guys isn’t lost on me. Hopefully more LEO officials will sing this song in our cities.

    Reply
  7. To “The Best Chris”. The issue is the same as in the Ukraine. Many on this site ARE willing to die for that right. Especially those who were in HS during the 60’s and 70’s who were actually taught history.
    Frederick the Great once pointed out to his retreating troops that they were not going to live forever, they were going to die sometime. May as well die for the right cause.
    It won’t take a large % of the population to fight. Throw in the nut bags and other disenchanted people and we have enough to go.

    Reply
  8. It is irresponsible journalism to call pro gun control people “gun safety advocates”. Legislation regarding prohibition of guns has zero to do with literal gun safety. A law that supports teaching the 3/4 laws of safe gun handling would have gun safety advocates supporting it.

    Reply
  9. In what world do I own a Benelli M4 and a SCAR 16? I must have got a pay raise.

    Or are these the ONLY two guns I own? In that case I must have taken a pay cut…

    Reply
  10. Honestly, whichever I got my hands on first. Rabbi has some very valid points regarding the use of a shotgun but that might be more related to an offensive scenario. He right, I don’t think many of us would want to be room clearing with a shotgun… But this situation is different than what you would get from a purely offensive standpoint. The important thing is to get to the kids before the home invaders do. Once you are there in a defensive position, as soon as you get positive id on who is coming through that bedroom door, someone is going to get lit up. be it a small fast moving projectile or a group of slower moving projectiles per trigger press… they are both deadly.

    Reply
  11. You might be a member of the AI if…

    You had an opinion during the Israeli Supermodel Debate (ISD) of ’13.

    Dark times my friend, dark times. 🙂

    Reply
  12. You might be a member of the armed intelligentsia if you firmly believe the Second Amendment is the bulwark that defends the rest of the Bill of Rights, directly and indirectly.

    Additionally if you repeatedly remind people that bees have killed far more Americans than AR-15s you may also be a member of the armed intelligentsia.

    Reply
  13. Seriously though, shotgun. “0 dark”. A red dot sight is doing you no good at that distance/range. This will be reflex shooting in my hallway/living room/kitchen. Point shooting. Not aimed fire.

    I am putting down 2 guys. Whether or not they are high/drunk/delusional, they pose a threat to my family. They will be put down. Buckshot at close range is going to create the damage that I need.

    Reply
  14. IMHO (based on what little was reported) both individuals failed to exercise good judgment.

    The driver should have never left the truck, and when he did the officer should have been paying attention and immediately ordered the man back inside his truck. We don’t know exactly how it went down so it’s possible that did occur. If the driver failed to respond to multiple requests to return to his truck, and then reached into the bed of the truck and pulled out a long black object, then it’s going to be ruled a “good” shooting.

    However, if the driver opened the door, walked out of the truck, walked to the side, reached into the bed, withdrew the cane and then the officer looked up, panicked and jumped out shooting, he should no longer be on the police force. Hard to make a judgment without the in car video.

    Reply
  15. Just checked Gunbot. Lots of commie stuff out there from .21/rnd on up. Don’t make it worse than it is until it’s proven through reliable channels.

    Reply
  16. Thanks, RF. I really like this article. Why poke the bear? Isn’t maintaining your life, and your legal rights to protect yourself and your dear ones a little more important than grandstanding at the exact moment you get pulled over or encounter LE? I’m not making the argument that you should keep your head down and never stand up for the rights that you believe in, and I guess you’re braver than I am if you want to roll the dice with LE during an encounter that could turn nasty and even violent quickly. But anyone who tells me that they are walking down an urban road with a slung rifle or thigh rig and not looking to instigate an encounter with LEO’s is deluded or flat out lying. You know damn well they are going to get the call, and you know damn well they are going to show up and detain or question you. Why start that fight? Move slow. Be polite. Hand over your identification. Let them do their jobs so you don’t have to one day.

    Reply
  17. I’m waiting for the day when a reporter shouts the question to some political candidate “What’s your stance on gun control?!”, and that candidate’s only response is “Modified Weaver. Next question.”

    I’m voting for that candidate. Hell, watch out, someday I might *be* that candidate.

    Reply
  18. Could always get involved by yelling at the guy walking towards him etc. Something to get him to stop. If he makes a move towards you then, maybe it is time for a DGK. I dont know every situation is different. But at least you are helping a woman who is getting the crapped kicked out of her, come on people do something. That is a win in my book any day.

    Reply
  19. You know, I find it hard to judge people who say, “I’m not helping…”

    Is there a Good Samaritan clause in the local law, freeing the person intervening of legal liability if things go south? Like with CPR?

    Is the person you saved going to pay your legal costs if the prosecutor decides to come after you?

    How do you know that the woman you are saving isn’t dating the man who’s whooping her ass? What if she sides with him during questioning?

    If you can’t abide something going on in front of you and you feel you must act, I completely understand. But, don’t judge someone who is not willing to jump head first into a situation they do not fully understand.

    The police do not have an obligation to protect, so why should anyone else…

    Reply
  20. This could have been a sexual assault in progress not just a case of road rage. I would have done something, probably starting with a flying drop kick to the guy’s face to stop the attack. Then go from there.

    Reply
  21. way to contribute to inflation, TTAG. are you fucking serious? “post Russian invasion”??? more like peaceful Russian occupation of a region which is predominantly populated with Russians. and there is no panic buying. titling articles like this to inspire drama to get more readers makes you as credible as James Yeager.

    Reply
  22. “… the Ghost vest can handle a 158gr. JHP round of .357 Magnum at 1400fps and all lesser threats.”

    My understanding is that velocity defeats ballistic vests. So how about a .357 Magnum 125 grain JHP at 1600 fps?

    And what about Spitzer (pointy) bullets from Magnum handguns? Would those penetrate common ballistic vests? I know they would tend to suck as a defensive round but what other options do you have if your threat profile includes attackers who wear ballistic vests?

    Reply
  23. No colt or weatherby products for me. They are both cowards in their unrespectable states. If Connecticut really cares, they would throw those dirty politicians out just like Colorado did! The Republicans may want our guns too but their not stupid enough to take them! I just can’t understand why these hypocrite gun companies are doing this. Shooting and robbing Peter to pay Paul. Walther came to Arkansas, at least for shipping and magpul moved. Its small jobs but you know what, screw you! These states are begging them to come! No unions, Satan at his finest, tax breaks for the company, and……the Dem looses jobs for their state, especially one thats been there for more than 150 years.

    Reply
  24. I’ve liked this Sheriff for a long time. He continues to delight and surprise me.

    I’d be happy to have him as my county’s Sheriff. Forget about police chiefs; county sheriffs are the true backbone of America!

    Reply
  25. That is about the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. An amendment to repeal your proposed amendment is all that would be needed, and is the EXACT SAME BAR as modifying or repealing the 2nd amendment.

    Reply

Leave a Comment