Even if you have the ability to defend yourself against a bully that is motivated by piss and vinegar, that doesn’t mean you want a target on your back or for them to see you coming.
My guess is that many of the people who are willing to resist kinetically aren’t going to say anything or threaten anyone.
One day, a thug kicks down the wrong door and punches his own ticket. The next day the paranoia grips the jackboots and they start passing gun laws in a hurry.
Lots of cold dead hands after that and no one is willing to volunteer to be first in line to kick off that process.
Historically, this is why police come after you while you’re in a car, at work, or otherwise out and about. I’m curious whether, if it ever came to that point, a court would approve seizure* of any records at gun ranges or otherwise to gather data on people who might have guns (being very specific with that ‘might have’ wording), and then issue warrants to seize said people on the street, and then issue search warrants for the home. It would be a pretty wild reversal of evidence and probable cause. The politicians and cops would try to sell it to the maga fools as being the only way to keep cops safe from antifa terrorists, and I’d bet they would buy it.
That (judges signing off on such wild bullshit) would be so far into fascist territory that we might as well be at the bottom of fascism lake.
*This would probably be a grand jury subpoena, which both has lower evidence needs and relies on the reasoning that your transactions/records with a business are not as private as other areas of your life. Cops give these to DAs all the time to gather evidence on a case without the need to go to a judge, so blaming the courts here might be too hasty.
Never threaten.
Even if you have the ability to defend yourself against a bully that is motivated by piss and vinegar, that doesn’t mean you want a target on your back or for them to see you coming.
My guess is that many of the people who are willing to resist kinetically aren’t going to say anything or threaten anyone.
One day, a thug kicks down the wrong door and punches his own ticket. The next day the paranoia grips the jackboots and they start passing gun laws in a hurry.
Lots of cold dead hands after that and no one is willing to volunteer to be first in line to kick off that process.
Historically, this is why police come after you while you’re in a car, at work, or otherwise out and about. I’m curious whether, if it ever came to that point, a court would approve seizure* of any records at gun ranges or otherwise to gather data on people who might have guns (being very specific with that ‘might have’ wording), and then issue warrants to seize said people on the street, and then issue search warrants for the home. It would be a pretty wild reversal of evidence and probable cause. The politicians and cops would try to sell it to the maga fools as being the only way to keep cops safe from antifa terrorists, and I’d bet they would buy it.
That (judges signing off on such wild bullshit) would be so far into fascist territory that we might as well be at the bottom of fascism lake.
*This would probably be a grand jury subpoena, which both has lower evidence needs and relies on the reasoning that your transactions/records with a business are not as private as other areas of your life. Cops give these to DAs all the time to gather evidence on a case without the need to go to a judge, so blaming the courts here might be too hasty.