tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post3296353632608726037..comments2023-09-16T03:06:44.703-07:00Comments on III Percent: RE-POST: 300 yard Self DefenseUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-77775091690467839232015-07-24T14:54:24.153-07:002015-07-24T14:54:24.153-07:00Wow lots of Homeland Security geeks coming in here...Wow lots of Homeland Security geeks coming in here to mess with the wrong patriots. You guys need to find a better place to put such truthful conversation like our own forfather's did. We need to have meetings that are private no phones allowed they record video and audio 24/7 of your life. And if you goto fight toss all the electronic crap in a fire it's the spy in your pocket and the Internet is also a patriots worst nightmare. God bless American patriots be safe. Next buy a top notch drone blocker. So when electronic hell is unleashed on our families you can jam it's signal and recover that device and retask it for better purpose. I will post this for now on so u know who is writing this in the future. Sheeple are nothing more than an ID10T error .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-15459459589402395192014-06-20T23:26:13.291-07:002014-06-20T23:26:13.291-07:00AgreedAgreedAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12986802521851246854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-45369973502693614312014-01-14T16:39:18.133-08:002014-01-14T16:39:18.133-08:00Mr. Kerodin,
An additional question related to th...Mr. Kerodin,<br /><br />An additional question related to the previous one: as pointed out in your statement, the threat is indeed everywhere, from lawyers and thugs-in-uniform to bureaucrats and neighbors who vote for them. What is the appropriate response to neutralize this threat? The solution that seems to be offered is an immediate resort to physical means for permanent neutralization, but as noted in my previous post, this method of response almost certainly brings grave threats to the Liberty and Life of oneself and one's family as well. Yet these threats are not to be tolerated. What then is the solution? What of when the threat is stronger than any armed resistance possible, as occurred during the martial law imposed by the thugs-in-uniform after the so-called Boston Marathon Bombing? How should even a group of well-armed individuals protect their Liberty from such Threats?<br /><br />~Curious For TruthAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-6279143469196876912014-01-14T16:31:34.239-08:002014-01-14T16:31:34.239-08:00Mr. Kerodin,
While the Doctrine you set forth wou...Mr. Kerodin,<br /><br />While the Doctrine you set forth would seem very reasonable in an anarchic environment and community, how can it be used in the current situation that is the "United States of America" today without bringing harm to one's own family and loved ones? If one makes an effort to physically cause the cessation of the threat posed by a neighbor voting for a measure that would Threaten you, in this society such an action would bring down the full force of these Thugs In Uniform to gun oneself and one's loved ones down. Is this a risk that must be accepted in the pursuit of Liberty? Can the Doctrine be applied without endangering one's family?<br /><br />~Curious For TruthAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-77621290189537861702013-10-11T08:24:52.875-07:002013-10-11T08:24:52.875-07:00Clement, you stand among a large group of people w...Clement, you stand among a large group of people who read what they want to read instead of the words on the page.<br /><br />Somehow I think you must fall into one of the categories of people from whom I feel justified in defending myself. Just a hunch. <br /><br />But just for clarity, let me posit: If I am your neighbor and I vote for a politician who promises to impose a 100% income tax on you and yours, you feel no right to physically defend yourself until...when? <br /><br />And keep in mind the parameters as clearly set forth in the Doctrine: The outcome must be <i>possible</i> and legitimate...<br /><br />KKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17465944474238091234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-33719583869270556332013-10-10T22:41:42.701-07:002013-10-10T22:41:42.701-07:00Except of course, this definition of "self-de...Except of course, this definition of "self-defense" can be (and frequently is) used to justify any act of violence carried out by anyone against anyone, under any possible circumstances, real or imagined, because the attacker can claim that the victim was a threat to them. See Bush, G. W. vs Hussein, S (2003). Or... every single war since "because we want your land and food and valuables" stopped being a good enough excuse in polite society.<br /><br />Indeed, as the definition itself contains a clear, explicit threat against, well, everyone in at least the United States and probably elsewhere (except, conveniently, the people most likely to ever do something about it), every one of the persons threatened in this manifesto could legitimately claim this principle of "self-defense" as an excuse to gun the author down in the street.<br /><br />As is typical of all philosophical systems that try to stretch single, simple principles to cover all possible circumstances of human life, it cannot be applied to real human behavior without horrific consequences for all involved.<br /><br />In all seriousness, I hope you find a good therapist and together find a way to deal with your anger issues. The first step is acknowledging that you have a problem.<br /><br />Love and Peace.Clement C.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-40142368504646408352013-09-25T12:25:06.017-07:002013-09-25T12:25:06.017-07:00Kerodin,
Your assessment is dead on, and we will ...Kerodin,<br /><br />Your assessment is dead on, and we will see it. Your essay is, indeed fair warning, as many others have also issued:<br /><br />Therefore, as much as my soul laments against the harsh truth before me, I make this declaration to my enemies who press me into this battle, that none shall be able to afterwards say “I did not know, you did not warn me”;<br />RTWT - http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/a-time-to-kill/<br />LT Prepperhttp://www.ncrenegade.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-38295075129955566452013-09-24T12:29:16.790-07:002013-09-24T12:29:16.790-07:00You too. Take a look around and understand where y...You too. Take a look around and understand where you're at. Go cogitate someplace else. Take Anonymous with you. Maybe you two can cogitate together. Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-46649082758948385022013-09-24T09:01:01.742-07:002013-09-24T09:01:01.742-07:00Anon,
The Constitution was written to ESTABLISH th...Anon,<br />The Constitution was written to ESTABLISH this mess. It laid the foundations not of peace and prosperity, but of our enslavement to the State. Further, the colonists rebelled against the crown for LESS than has been done here. But read the Declaration, don't take my word for it - we're seeing the VERY complaints the colonists raised.<br />And the Bill of Rights was eroded from Day 1. <br /><br />9th and 10th died at Appomattox Courthouse, April 9, 1865. First was killed outright with Patriot 1, if not before. Fifth has been destroyed as well, and Fourth died with DWI checkpoints, if not sooner. Second in 1934, if not arguably before - everything since that ban on "dangerous assault weapons" (to use the buzzwords of today) is essentially turning off the life-support. Again, groundwork was laid: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States#Revolutionary_War<br />(Keep reading down the links - it's where the Statist interpretations became a big deal.)<br /><br />Arguably, the 3rd amendment is not yet fully dead, though with the emerging surveillance state, and the actual asset forfeiture laws, and the occasions where police force people out of their homes - it's sort of de facto dead, if not de jure.<br />Sixth, Speedy trial - RIGHT. Don't know when, but evidently DEAD.<br />7th - well, 1973 they cut the jury to 6 instead of 12. Maybe this one's still alive in some way?<br />Eighth Amendment? Excessive bail, and cruel and unusual punishment? Hm, your assets can be seized without trial; your funds frozen, and yet - because you HAVE assets - you can be denied a Public Defender? How about SWAT raids at 3:30 AM, burning your daughtyer, or gettign family (or YOU) shot, for the crime of OWNING - not even SELLING, just OWNING - plants. (Includes examples like raiding a house that is growing TOMATO plants. Or the flash-bang that burned a young girl because the SWAT operator didn't know how the equipment worked? Or the policy of murdering dogs which are clearly family pets? "Collaterol Damage" is A-OK if the Cops do it? The "I smell pot" excuse to force entry into a home and do whatever they wish?) Yeah, dead.<br />Bear in mind that the ILLUSION of freedom is infinitely easier to maintain, and it allows CONTROL of the populace. If we don't deal with the little things, on principle - we have abandoned the field of battle.<br /><br />Further, we now have a tyrant issuing orders via "Executive Order" - a king in all but name.<br /><br />We've been declared PROPERTY of the State.<br /><br />Now, what are we going to DO about it, since (1) Elections are fixed, and regatrdless of election results, the Agenda continues the same; (2) Jury Nullification has been declared a crime, outright - and can result in jail time; (3) Freedom of Speech? Where? Invisible freedom of speach = government censorship. <br /><br />We are being aggressed against. I do NOT have a solution - yet. But I'm still cogitating...<br />Bill Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07312167460324611006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-54302955326466650432013-09-24T08:26:52.763-07:002013-09-24T08:26:52.763-07:00Well, once the arm is detached, it can be inserted...Well, once the arm is detached, it can be inserted elbow-first into an ear fairly easily. :-DBill Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07312167460324611006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-53796699945363474602013-09-24T07:58:20.310-07:002013-09-24T07:58:20.310-07:00Am I correct in thinking that the 18th Amendment w...Am I correct in thinking that the 18th Amendment was negated by the 21st Amendment?<br /><br />Why shouldn't that happen with any of the others?<br /><br />However, you state that this would mean 'war'. How so? Isn't it true that there are some 20,000 un-Constitutional firearms laws on the books? AFAICS, there has been no effective resistance to those.<br /><br />Anyways, the point I am trying to make is that the RKBA does not reside within the Constitution. It lives independently of any such 'authority'. The Constitution is merely a formal recognition of the RKBA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-6883052419405724352013-09-24T05:29:09.359-07:002013-09-24T05:29:09.359-07:00Uh, slick, you're in the wrong place. You gott...Uh, slick, you're in the wrong place. You gotta have rocks in your head coming in to this blog with those patently ignorant arguments.<br /><br />Time to go. You will gain no traction here.<br /><br />Sorry Sam, I just really can't suffer these fools and idiots with their same parroted arguments ad nauseum. My politeness has pretty much come to an end.<br /><br />Feel free to not post this comment if you feel I'm out of line.Alan W. Mullenaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13084509138950656937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-13990507682101932032013-09-23T20:14:02.223-07:002013-09-23T20:14:02.223-07:00You're right about the logical fallacy there, ...You're right about the logical fallacy there, and it cuts both ways. Human Agency is the sole causation, and that's that.<br /><br />You can probably prove that the Constitution is the best instantiation of Rule of Law ever created. What you can't prove is that Rule of Law will ever trump Human Agency. That's because it never could, which is a decent explanation for why it never has.<br /><br />With consent, Rule of Law is a wonderful thing. But then, with consent pretty much anything is.Jim Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-78607343875800233182013-09-23T18:41:48.567-07:002013-09-23T18:41:48.567-07:00Sorry - the first ten amendments are NOT open for ...Sorry - the first ten amendments are NOT open for repeal - read the preamble. Any attempt to do so is immediate violation of the compact and war.Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17465944474238091234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-46663088387792394202013-09-23T14:06:03.655-07:002013-09-23T14:06:03.655-07:00I just recieved my first real American Flag. The C...I just recieved my first real American Flag. The Civil Peacetime Flag. Awesome. Oh, and good post dude.<br /><br />Jim NDV IIIAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-15372651640847641042013-09-23T09:16:56.701-07:002013-09-23T09:16:56.701-07:00Here's a question for everyone who says, "...Here's a question for everyone who says, "I believe in the Constitution."<br /><br />Let's imagine that a Congress/Senate jumped through all the hoops and amended the Bill of Rights. That's possible ... even conceivable.<br /><br />Now, let's imagine that they amended the BoR so as to strike out the Second Amendment. All done "legally" and with full respect to the relevant articles of the Constitution.<br /><br />How many of you would shrug your shoulders, cite the power of that "bit of paper" and say, "Turn in your guns, guys. Every last one of them."<br /><br />If you are reading this and thinking, "No way would I turn in my guns.", then I would suggest that DO NOT believe in that "bit of paper". I would suggest that your beliefs are founded upon something deeper. Something which is internal to your own psyche and character.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-83995212699703410842013-09-23T07:51:52.986-07:002013-09-23T07:51:52.986-07:00Sorry, using the argument that "...the piece ...Sorry, using the argument that "...the piece of paper [Constitution] never stopped us from sliding into tyranny is like saying the gun bears the responsibility to firing and killing the kid without Human Agency as a participant.<br /><br />The logical fallacy is beyond the ability to measure.<br /><br />People are the problem - with guns killing kids and with pieces per stopping tyranny.<br /><br />KKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17465944474238091234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-79697035706979009882013-09-23T05:15:32.399-07:002013-09-23T05:15:32.399-07:00Kerodin'
Spot on Brother Patriot!! If there i...Kerodin'<br /><br />Spot on Brother Patriot!! If there is no objection, I would like to pass this along to others in my A.O. that are of like mind.<br /><br />Flat-Land Patriot in the SoutheastAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-8828721813283820592013-09-23T04:13:35.749-07:002013-09-23T04:13:35.749-07:00A proactive defense is completely justified under ...A proactive defense is completely justified under the right conditions. and that's how I teach it in my tactical courses. Only a fool will let an obvious threat get close enough to his loved ones to do them harm in SHTF. Mason Dixon TacticalAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00671140850098921150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-10408360975713625712013-09-23T03:34:58.553-07:002013-09-23T03:34:58.553-07:00Right on, brother.Right on, brother.Samhttp://guerrillamerica.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-40677678586630707082013-09-23T03:22:53.104-07:002013-09-23T03:22:53.104-07:00I was with you for most of your article. I thought...I was with you for most of your article. I thought, "This man is basically expressing the Non-Aggression Principle. <br /><br />Like you, I look at "threats" systemically... so, rather than seeing the policeman's gun as the threat, I conceive of the whole system that led to that gun being in those hands at that time. Thousands of people "collaborated" in creating that threat. So, "the enemy" is everywhere. And vulnerable.<br /><br />But, in recognising these facts, you set your mind into the mentality of Civil War. Father against Son. Wife against Husband. <br /><br />However, you lost me once you cited the virtues of the Constitution. I don't hold much faith in "bits of paper" and it's pretty obvious that the Constitution has had no power to prevent the American slide into fascism. <br /><br />But, even within the Constitution, the provisions for taxation represent State' violence against every individual ... at the most basic level. I can't support a document which enshrines that behaviour. <br /><br />Do no harm and cause no loss. That's all the Constitution that is needed, IMO.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-39443924421687590012013-09-22T21:16:25.526-07:002013-09-22T21:16:25.526-07:00Those who intend you harm may arrive in a hardened...Those who intend you harm may arrive in a hardened vehicle; eventually, the passengers will be exposed when they leave the vehicle and the support people who service and fuel the vehicle will be exposed, as well. Those who intend you harm are vulnerable, often in ways they do not expect. <br /><br />This is a fine article/blog, thank you for publishing it.No Political Lemmingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11788147901949209178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-2322537576323112452013-09-22T21:05:14.863-07:002013-09-22T21:05:14.863-07:00Although I have always felt the same way as Kerodi...Although I have always felt the same way as Kerodin does, I have never quite put it to words. Well done! <br /><br />In all my years, (67 of them) I have been fortunate not have had to confront many people who would transgress against me. I have always thought it was "body language" or just my "attitude" that kept people at bay. But after reading "Kerotin's Doctrine", maybe it is a mindset that exudes a warning to others, telegraphing "danger". <br /><br />Reading the words of this Doctrine have brought me to a place I have been before. Several could have died and would have, except for a fleeting sense of "level of seriousness" on my part. My questions at the time were, was the threat enough to kill for or will just the threat of dying be enough to keep them off my back. And was their threat worth paying the consequences if I had ended their threat for this lifetime?<br /><br />That's a lot to think about in the few seconds while your hands are choking the lifes blood from someone elses brain. But it happened. <br /><br />The one thing I would like to learn, but probably not in the shape to learn anymore is, how do you slam an elbow into someone elses ear? That is something I should have learned many, many years ago. I can do claw hammers though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-71614923449132988092013-09-22T18:13:04.139-07:002013-09-22T18:13:04.139-07:00Great Reading.Great Reading.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18367393090015886911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4236695365244926782.post-6614551078530188652013-09-22T07:14:57.014-07:002013-09-22T07:14:57.014-07:00Very well said. Well thought out and stated clearl...Very well said. Well thought out and stated clearly. It happens to be my attitude too. Thanks for posting it!HK-91https://www.blogger.com/profile/17414784039164310086noreply@blogger.com