Executive order protecting federal statues, monuments.

There will be no buffers between the citizens and the criminals. No criminal justice system (it's racist) or cops. First disarm the cops, then the general population.

Don't worry the politicians will be protected while they strip you of any right or method to defend yourself.

From what I've seen in Atlanta, and the "Zone", the ones walking around with AR style rifles resemble paid mercenaries.

Notice that the Minneapolis city council has paid security now, not cops. I would imagine the security team can be sued (they have no immunity from prosecution) hmmm how could that go wrong...
Right now, there are over 2000 lawsuits filed between New York, Seattle and Minneapolis. I haven’t heard about Chicago yet, but I’m sure they also have plenty of suits pending. How they are going to pay off these suits is anyone’s guess. All cities carry some insurance, but these suits could end being in the tens of millions.
 

This is very similar to the actions of anarchists and communists of the 30’s. America’s left was enamored with Marx and Lenin. The difference today is few politicians have the backbone to stand up to criminal behavior. Marxists are just as popular today, thinly disguised along with “progressives”. Since Yesterday is a book I recommend for anyone wanting to see just how much today parallels that time before WW II.

These actions are much better organized and funded than many want to believe. It’s always interesting how Antifa agitates the crowd then vanishes.

This will not end well. We will all lose. Defund the cops, no weapons, leaves you no way to defend yourself or home.
Could you tell us the name of the book? I'd love to read it! Thank you.
This will be a war between the old order and the new order. I feel this has been planned for a long time in men's minds. It's happening so fast.
What is the best way to fight this? Does anyone know?
 
Last edited:
Could you tell us the name of the book? I'd love to read it! Thank you.
This will be a war between the old order and the new order. I feel this has been planned for a long time in men's minds. It's happening so fast.
What is the best way to fight this? Does anyone know?

Look's like the book is called "since yesterday"
As for the best way to fight this... I'm afraid bloodshed may be the answer. :(

29096892._UY200_.jpg
 

Look's like the book is called "since yesterday"
As for the best way to fight this... I'm afraid bloodshed may be the answer. :(

View attachment 111388
Thank you! I fear,by the end of the year, the military may be brought in to fight. I already see similarities to pre WW11.
Do you know, what is the average homeowner legally allowed to do in defense, if the need arises? I won't bend to this. I will fight, but living alone, It may be scary. I will get the book!
 
Thank you! I fear,by the end of the year, the military may be brought in to fight. I already see similarities to pre WW11.
Do you know, what is the average homeowner legally allowed to do in defense, if the need arises? I won't bend to this. I will fight, but living alone, It may be scary. I will get the book!

If you are in New Mexico, I looked it up.
"In New Mexico they do have the castle doctrine duty and there is no duty to retreat when there is a threat of attack. Deadly force may be used to protect one's self or another in the face of immediate threat of a felony, serious injury, or death. When deadly force is used it must be used in a way that a reasonable person would have".

So, while it seems that they do have the castle doctrine, (to protect you in your home) New Mexico also has a duty to retreat law, before force for self defense can be used. (if you are threatened outside your home) They do however have a self-defense law, but it is based on extremely old statutes that say a homicide is only justified when it is committed due to a necessary need to defend life, family, or property. That ends up in a kind of conflicting gray area.

Clear as mud, ehhh?
 
If you are in New Mexico, I looked it up.
"In New Mexico they do have the castle doctrine duty and there is no duty to retreat when there is a threat of attack. Deadly force may be used to protect one's self or another in the face of immediate threat of a felony, serious injury, or death. When deadly force is used it must be used in a way that a reasonable person would have".

So, while it seems that they do have the castle doctrine, (to protect you in your home) New Mexico also has a duty to retreat law, before force for self defense can be used. (if you are threatened outside your home) They do however have a self-defense law, but it is based on extremely old statutes that say a homicide is only justified when it is committed due to a necessary need to defend life, family, or property. That ends up in a kind of conflicting gray area.

Clear as mud, ehhh?
Wow! Thank you so much! No, That clarifies a little! This is much appreciated!
 
Here in Canada you are allowed, expected to defend yourself and your property, however you better have all your ducks in a line. It will be expensive and likely you will be charged with something serious even it is ruled as self defence.
I can and will defend myself and mine with everything I have, come what may.
 
Could you tell us the name of the book? I'd love to read it! Thank you.
This will be a war between the old order and the new order. I feel this has been planned for a long time in men's minds. It's happening so fast.
What is the best way to fight this? Does anyone know?

My apologies for not putting the name of the book in italics or quotation marks. There is another book of his by the title of “Only Yesterday” about the twenties lead up to the crash. ”Since Yesterday“ was published in 1940,”Only Yesterday” in 1931.

And I apologize if I scared you, that wasn’t my intention. Just disappointed in our lack of fortitude when it comes to stopping these criminal acts.
 
Last edited:
My apologies for not putting the name of the book in italics or quotation marks. There is another book of his by the title of “Only Yesterday” about the twenties lead up to the crash. ”Since Yesterday“ was published in 1940,”Only Yesterday” in 1931.

And I apologize if I scared you, that wasn’t my intention. Just disappointed in our lack of fortitude when it comes to stopping these criminal acts.
Oh no1 No need to apologize! You didn't scare me. I know a civil war is coming the old ways against the new. I know there will be bloodshed. That's why your message resonated with me. I ordered the book. I'll be a good target with my American flag and my "Support Law Enforcement" flag. But we must stand up for our beliefs. Thank you for your GREAT posts!
 
Last edited:
Squatting Dog, J.B. 911, Lakeland Living, Old and in the Way,; I am honored to be in a discussion with men of your caliber. All of you are real men who will stand up for America, for independence, and for freedom. I wish more men were like all of you! Thank you for your courage and your strength!
 
If you are in New Mexico, I looked it up.
"In New Mexico they do have the castle doctrine duty and there is no duty to retreat when there is a threat of attack. Deadly force may be used to protect one's self or another in the face of immediate threat of a felony, serious injury, or death. When deadly force is used it must be used in a way that a reasonable person would have".

So, while it seems that they do have the castle doctrine, (to protect you in your home) New Mexico also has a duty to retreat law, before force for self defense can be used. (if you are threatened outside your home) They do however have a self-defense law, but it is based on extremely old statutes that say a homicide is only justified when it is committed due to a necessary need to defend life, family, or property. That ends up in a kind of conflicting gray area.

Clear as mud, ehhh?
The Constitution allows for the use of the military only in extreme situations and I can tell you that we are not to that point yet. The Constitution, which trumps (pun not intended) all state laws, allows anyone the right to defend and/or to protect themselves or their property. The problem that police run into most often is that citizens often will make their own interpretation of the amendments in the Constitution.

The old myth of shooting someone and then dragging them inside your home is as false as it gets. “What if” you are out on the street and someone threatens you with a knife. Instead of reaching for your wallet, you pull out a gun and shoot the person. What are you going to do? Drag them home, so you can say they were attempting to enter illegally?

When people ask me when are they allowed to shoot someone, I always tell them that they need to be careful. You will always have to prove that the threat was real and that you had a logical explanation as to why you felt you were in danger. Otherwise, I could shoot someone and tell law enforcement that I felt afraid because he looked like a tough guy. If that were the case, we would have bodies lying everywhere.
 
The problem for me, 911, is my late husband, who was a Federal Marshal, told me that shooting someone is not like you watch on T.V. If you aim a gun at someone, be prepared to follow through and kill him. He had killed 11 men during his life. (Law enforcement and war) It's blood and guts flying everywhere. I have a Colt s/a but could I ever shoot anyone? actually kill some human being? I could give my life to uphold freedom but to kill someone? I couldn't. I hope this does not come to the point where this is a decision I have to make.
 
[
The problem for me, 911, is my late husband, who was a Federal Marshal, told me that shooting someone is not like you watch on T.V. If you aim a gun at someone, be prepared to follow through and kill him. He had killed 11 men during his life. (Law enforcement and war) It's blood and guts flying everywhere. I have a Colt s/a but could I ever shoot anyone? actually kill some human being? I could give my life to uphold freedom but to kill someone? I couldn't. I hope this does not come to the point where this is a decision I have to make.


Sage advice, a US Marshall is a thankless job...sorry for your loss.

I'll tell a little story about a friend of mine.

First a little background, we have a very solid Castle Doctrine Statute in my state, the current AG was my son's college roommate and is staunch about standing by the current law.

Now the story....

She is in her mid 60's, lives alone in a not so great section of town. A little naive about some things but has a CCW and several handguns.

Her house was burgled one day while she was gone, her guns were stolen along with her late mother's car and some jewelry.

After the detectives dusted for prints and looked over the entry point, they promised to follow up with some extra patrols.

She stayed in the house against the wishes of several of us, I was begging her not stay until she had her alarm system hooked back up and had someone stay with her for a few days. She was shaken up by the experience but confident that she could handle it. This is her late mother's house, the trees and bushes around the house had not been cut back in years.

The next night they tried to break in again with her inside the house unarmed.....at 1:30 AM.

She was screaming at them while on the 911 call. If she had not had solid doors that were well bolted they would have gotten in and no telling what might have happened. It was a male and a female drug addict that had been walking up and down the street (there is a shabby trailer park just up the road from her) to check her movements the first break in.

But they had actually hidden in a room that was separate from the house that had walk across upstairs access to her bedroom of all places.

This is an excellent example of how to avoid a bad outcome, be smart about how your home is protected. Had she shot them she would not have been prosecuted, but had to live with her actions the rest of her life. They caught both of them, long rap sheets, they ruined her car, it was permeated with the smell of meth.

I firmly believe in living a low key lifestyle and harden my house from the inside, solid doors, double bolts, a door jamb for the front door and an escape route. No garage doors left open to draw attention.

Being aware sounds paranoid to some but it's smart preparation that keeps people safe.
 
[



Sage advice, a US Marshall is a thankless job...sorry for your loss.

I'll tell a little story about a friend of mine.

First a little background, we have a very solid Castle Doctrine Statute in my state, the current AG was my son's college roommate and is staunch about standing by the current law.

Now the story....

She is in her mid 60's, lives alone in a not so great section of town. A little naive about some things but has a CCW and several handguns.

Her house was burgled one day while she was gone, her guns were stolen along with her late mother's car and some jewelry.

After the detectives dusted for prints and looked over the entry point, they promised to follow up with some extra patrols.

She stayed in the house against the wishes of several of us, I was begging her not stay until she had her alarm system hooked back up and had someone stay with her for a few days. She was shaken up by the experience but confident that she could handle it. This is her late mother's house, the trees and bushes around the house had not been cut back in years.

The next night they tried to break in again with her inside the house unarmed.....at 1:30 AM.

She was screaming at them while on the 911 call. If she had not had solid doors that were well bolted they would have gotten in and no telling what might have happened. It was a male and a female drug addict that had been walking up and down the street (there is a shabby trailer park just up the road from her) to check her movements the first break in.

But they had actually hidden in a room that was separate from the house that had walk across upstairs access to her bedroom of all places.

This is an excellent example of how to avoid a bad outcome, be smart about how your home is protected. Had she shot them she would not have been prosecuted, but had to live with her actions the rest of her life. They caught both of them, long rap sheets, they ruined her car, it was permeated with the smell of meth.

I firmly believe in living a low key lifestyle and harden my house from the inside, solid doors, double bolts, a door jamb for the front door and an escape route. No garage doors left open to draw attention.

Being aware sounds paranoid to some but it's smart preparation that keeps people safe.
Good advise! Thank you! My alarm system is my Australian Shepard.
 
The Constitution allows for the use of the military only in extreme situations and I can tell you that we are not to that point yet. The Constitution, which trumps (pun not intended) all state laws, allows anyone the right to defend and/or to protect themselves or their property. The problem that police run into most often is that citizens often will make their own interpretation of the amendments in the Constitution.

The old myth of shooting someone and then dragging them inside your home is as false as it gets. “What if” you are out on the street and someone threatens you with a knife. Instead of reaching for your wallet, you pull out a gun and shoot the person. What are you going to do? Drag them home, so you can say they were attempting to enter illegally?

When people ask me when are they allowed to shoot someone, I always tell them that they need to be careful. You will always have to prove that the threat was real and that you had a logical explanation as to why you felt you were in danger. Otherwise, I could shoot someone and tell law enforcement that I felt afraid because he looked like a tough guy. If that were the case, we would have bodies lying everywhere.

There's one messy mystery that's been going around for a long time- the belief that a person cannot even put his/her hands on another individual to protect/defend himself/herself, and to do so could result in arrest for 'assault.'
You wouldn't believe how many average citizens do nothing against physical attacks, etc., simply because they don't want to risk 'going to jail.'

To further complicate matters- after one incident, I went as far as to contact a local government agency (can't recall which one) to see what rights, if any, a person has. Basically verifying the concern, the individual who replied said 'it all depends on the responding officer.' I don't know anyone who'd be willing to take that chance- I certainly would not.
 
There's one messy mystery that's been going around for a long time- the belief that a person cannot even put his/her hands on another individual to protect/defend himself/herself, and to do so could result in arrest for 'assault.'
You wouldn't believe how many average citizens do nothing against physical attacks, etc., simply because they don't want to risk 'going to jail.'

To further complicate matters- after one incident, I went as far as to contact a local government agency (can't recall which one) to see what rights, if any, a person has. Basically verifying the concern, the individual who replied said 'it all depends on the responding officer.' I don't know anyone who'd be willing to take that chance- I certainly would not.

The Castle Doctrine in states that have one, protects you if the other person initiated the attack.

Meet force with force is the legal jargon, (including deadly force if threatened with death or great bodily harm) to paraphrase.
 
There's one messy mystery that's been going around for a long time- the belief that a person cannot even put his/her hands on another individual to protect/defend himself/herself, and to do so could result in arrest for 'assault.'
You wouldn't believe how many average citizens do nothing against physical attacks, etc., simply because they don't want to risk 'going to jail.'

To further complicate matters- after one incident, I went as far as to contact a local government agency (can't recall which one) to see what rights, if any, a person has. Basically verifying the concern, the individual who replied said 'it all depends on the responding officer.' I don't know anyone who'd be willing to take that chance- I certainly would not.
In Pennsylvania, putting your hands on someone, shoving or pushing them is not an assault charge. We only write a citation for "Harassment." If there is an injury where medical treatment is/was necessary, then we have to look at it a little deeper, but unless it was an all out brawl, probably not much will come from it.
 
In Pennsylvania, putting your hands on someone, shoving or pushing them is not an assault charge. We only write a citation for "Harassment." If there is an injury where medical treatment is/was necessary, then we have to look at it a little deeper, but unless it was an all out brawl, probably not much will come from it.
Pennsylvania = common sense.
Iowa = not so much.
 
YUP.... need to enforce the laws...
It has always been a Federal or State law, but with the EO in place, there is no discretion. If someone gets caught defacing or destroying one of these monuments, sworn lawn enforcement officers are charged to make an arrest and there will be consequences, per the EO.
 
Just wanted to add that if a state monument is damaged, the EO probably would not stand. Law enforcement probably would have some powers of discretion, unless the Governor noted otherwise.
 
Pennsylvania = common sense.
Iowa = not so much.
You're right about that, but sometimes it works against us. In Pennsylvania, we are still using Old English laws in some instances, which takes away some of the police powers or discretion. For example; In your case, if two people got into an oral argument and one person shoved the other, the best thing to do for everyone is to talk it out, shake hands and walk away, but sometimes people can really be ignorant.

I had such an incident where two 'friends' got into an oral argument over something rather minor, like who was the all time best race car driver. One fellow shoved the other. I go out and speak with the two men and try to convince the fellow who wanted his friend arrested that they should just walk away. But he insisted. So, I wrote up a citation and handed it to him for "Harassment." The fine was $100.00, plus costs. I told him to appeal it and let it go before the District Justice. He did and the DJ dismissed the charges. A lot of wasted time and for what?

If we didn't use Old English laws in this case, I could have ignored the issue and drove away.
 
The problem for me, 911, is my late husband, who was a Federal Marshal, told me that shooting someone is not like you watch on T.V. If you aim a gun at someone, be prepared to follow through and kill him. He had killed 11 men during his life. (Law enforcement and war) It's blood and guts flying everywhere. I have a Colt s/a but could I ever shoot anyone? actually kill some human being? I could give my life to uphold freedom but to kill someone? I couldn't. I hope this does not come to the point where this is a decision I have to make.

I know when I went into the army, I was concerned that I'd not be able to take a life. However, when faced with the fact that others were trying to take my life made it easier (not the best choice of words) for me to defend myself. If you have to, there's no doubt it will haunt you for the rest of your life, (we call it the black snake) but, the answer is.... you are alive to live the rest of your life.
 
I know when I went into the army, I was concerned that I'd not be able to take a life. However, when faced with the fact that others were trying to take my life made it easier (not the best choice of words) for me to defend myself. If you have to, there's no doubt it will haunt you for the rest of your life, (we call it the black snake) but, the answer is.... you are alive to live the rest of your life.
Wow! What a mental decision to go through! You're much stronger than me! Maybe it's a feminine thing, I don't know. I've thought about it and my belief is that our soul lives through eternity, so it would be much easier to die (in the body) than to live with the knowledge that I took a life!
Of course i would want to live, but not at the expense of harming another soul!
I honestly give the highest honor to you for your decision and you were defending your country! Guess that makes me weak but I honestly don't think I could kill. Squatting Dog, I've read your posts and you truly are a man's man!
 


Back
Top