Are you allowed to booby trap your house so you can sleep safely at night?
On the off-chance this isn’t a joke, no, booby traps are largely illegal because they are indiscriminate and a danger to everyone in the premises, including the person setting the traps.
Yeah imagine you have a medical emergency or a fire or something and EMTs/firefighters come in and get caught in your boobytrap. Very not cool thing to do, those people are trying to save your life.
edit: if your concern is actually people coming in while you sleep you can get very effective barricades/reinforcements for doors and windows that can buy a lot of prep time.
In a more just world, our local police forces would stop this illegal activity.
That’s probably why states are trying to force local police to take on the role of ICE.
My city has what the governor and AG are calling “sanctuary city policy.”
Really the sheriff has just said they do not take a stance, but they don’t have the resources to handle the immigration responsibility the state wants them to take on. So the AG is wasting tax dollars bringing them to court this Wednesday to try and force the community to adopt federal policy.
How bout that small government and fiscal responsibility?
Our local cops owe their authority to the State
I have a hard time imagining a world with cops at all that don’t end up doing this
They are supposed to have some freedom from the state within their own city/county jurisdiction, but small government loving members of the GOP are trying to do away with that and force cities and counties to adopt state policy(which is often just federal policy).
My state AG is taking my parish to court over it this Wednesday
If you heard about the 2 year old that was just deported by ICE last week, that was also my state/parish.
Gee I wonder what Americans tend to do to trespassers.
I agree, but realistically there’s an entire private and public military behind this administration they could use against the people whenever they feel necessary.
The same people that argue what JD Vance does about the interpretation of the constitution not allowing for judicial decisions to supercede executive, also argue that it is up to an executive leader to uphold good/law and order as he sees fit. When it comes down to it, liberty is secondary to whatever the leader determines is necessary to maintain law and order.
Adrian Vermeule is a Harvard constitutional law professor who has been making the argument favoring executive authority and power over liberty for a very long time.
I agree with you, I just mean there’s a lot of Americans with guns, that have and are usually prepared to shoot people on their property. Whether they get in trouble? Idk depends if they figure out how to organize in time.
I just hope sometimes
An angry group of civilians would not stand much of a chance against an entire military/police force.
In addition to the entire military/national guard, state police, you also have Palantir and blackwater now on the side of the government
It worked in Vietnam and Afghanistan.
You’d be surprised what a disbursed guerilla force can do. Additionally, that assumes the entire army is still behind him even after he’s stripped so much from veterans.
Yeah, there’s already a video of them doing this.
It sounds like we should prepare for a rash of home invasion shootings. (I’m not promoting anything, just saying)
Easiest way to get shot.
And they will claim they are in their right to return force. Idk what to tell you. I agree this is fucked up and you should have a right to defend your home.
That is the most basic American shit. The people that are on the white house legal team agree with that unless it conflicts with executive authority. To me that seems like you might as well have a king at that point, but they believe that a leader is chosen to promote what is best for his people. Given he was elected to do that, law and order (which is up to the leaders interpretation) takes presedence over liberty.
Adrian Vermeule is a Harvard constitutional law professor who has been making the argument the constitution should be interpreted to favor executive authority and power over individual liberty for a very long time.
deleted by creator
I’m a fairly pacifist type, but I have a .30-06 rifle and a 9mm pistol loaded and by my bedside now. I’d like to get a shotgun though…but there are new rules where I am so it’s going to take some time.
Though it’s made by Israel, IWI makes a self defense shotgun that is California legal and holds 15 rounds.
Holy crap.
deleted by creator
Now I don’t do guns personally, so forgive me if I’m wrong. But wouldn’t buckshot also be finding soft tissue not covered by armor?
Semi related, I need to take self defense courses back up 🫡
So to answer your question, not really. The spread of shotguns is greatly exaggerated in media and in a close quarters situation will probably be not existent unless you are using really specific shit. The real threat especially with 12 gauge is that it is more than powerful enough to take limbs off, turn organs into soup, and if you get hit in the head ya ain’t living.
This is actually why sawed offs are so dangerous they do infact increase the spread and when used in close quarters yeah… ya have a good chance of survival but I hope ya like hospital food.
Also yes I know shotguns are rarely that devastating but I ain’t over exaggerating by much either, if it’s good for home defense, Iwo Jimma, and the trenches of Verdun I suspect it’s a rather effective weapon to say the least.
Also yes I know shotguns are rarely that devastating but I ain’t over exaggerating by much either
Yeah not by much at all.
Hitting a person with a single 12ga shell of 00 buckshot is kind of like completely mag dumping a 9mm handgun at them.
deleted by creator
Birdshot is perfectly acceptable in a home defense situation given the short ranges. It does have a lower lethality but unobstructed head and chest shots will most likely be fatal and will incapacitate.
An advantage to bird shot is that two layers of drywall may slow it down enough to prevent lethal injuries to bystanders such as family members in other rooms.
A disadvantage is that it will likely be stopped by body armor where buckshot packs enough punch that it can cause severe injury even if it doesn’t penetrate.
I don’t have ready sources for this, just general informed opinion.
Thank you for the info!
deleted by creator
So Trump is telling ICE to break the law? It looks like Trump is guilty of another crime.
Susan Collins just called: said he learned his lesson and it won’t happen again.
Fuck that bitch. Was the most laughably idiotic comment she could’ve made.
It’s only a crime if you are pursued for it. Until that happens, which it won’t, the law doesn’t matter.
Aren’t police and laws great? They do a wonderful job.
So far breaking the law hasn’t bit him yet. Why should he start following it now?
It’s not a crime if there’s nobody left to uphold the law.
Who’s gonna fuckin stop em??
They just arrested a judge. The only people who’ve been able to slow this roll.
What do you think happens next…?
The entire Armed Forces and Judicial Branch of the Executive is cronies from the Cabinet and AG down. If they feel like it they’ll mobilize militias to do their work for them.
Citizen cops. Watch out. You may not hate cops now, but you’ll understand what’s been wrong with the whole system real soon.
the people who follow his unlawful unconstitutional orders need to be held accountable for their actions when the next adminstration HAS to clean up this administrations messes.
This type of abuse is old as the hills. The rights enumerated in the constitution only apply to citizens. Look at how wiretapping is done among the “Five Eyes”. The USA just has allies do the snooping on its own citizens, conveniently dancing around the same constitutional protections. It’s unclear if even under the most charitable reading of the constitution if this should apply to an unlawful foreign resident of another country.
Cruel and unfair, definitely. Much like the electoral college, everyone likes to complain about it while not doing too much. If you find the above distasteful, then it should be made clear in US case law that aliens are eligible for constitutional protections. Until then, Trump and co. will gladly keep doing what they are doing, because they don’t care about “being fair”.
Bold assumption it won’t be citizens houses. Unachievable by a competent administrative.
Hey ICE, if the President tells you to do something illegal, you don’t do it! You can still be held liable.
Is it really that hard to have ethics anymore?
The things is based on their legal interpretation of the constitution, the people chose the president to uphold law and order and do what’s best for the people. If the president determines this is what is necessary in order to protect the people from terrorists, his legal team will argue for a constitutional interpretation that says individual liberty is always secondary to the common good.
Right, and history shows that these are major mistakes that always have consequences.
I hope so. If the Senate and representatives won’t take a stand (which seems they won’t), it will be up to police, federal agents, and military leaders taking a stand and refusing orders, probably being terminated if not jailed/court martialed, and public support for them.
the supreme court gets to decide this. And considering some of the recent rulings about due process, I am hopeful.
But how are they going to enforce it? They’ve enforced 0 rulings so far. Trump has been publicly mocking them while defying their orders
I am hopeful if it does, but the memo is saying they can just do this. So it will take this actually being enforced and someone’s (or multiple people’s) rights being violated for this to end up before the supreme court.
I think it’s no coincidence there was such a high profile arrest of that judge in Wisconsin just before this happened.
ICE doesn’t care. They’re obviously enjoying being able to do what theyve been doing the past few months.
There are federal agents that have been reshuffled to ICE as punishment for the Jan 6 investigations, and have been accused of leaking information to the press.
I originally just thought the termination of civil rights offices would mainly be to use polygraphs on these employees and refuse due process rights because so many were trying to warn people of what this administration is doing.
I wasn’t expecting something like this memo so soon.
There are definitely plenty of loyalists carrying this shit out, but I believe the administration may be intentionally trying to reshuffle as many federal employees as possible (and now city police to ICE) to increase civil unrest and increase the chances the public will turn on the same people leaking information.
If Congress won’t do their job, it will come down to these people willing to refuse orders and face termination if not arrest. The only reason I bring this up, is that if this happens we should keep in mind that there have been people inside ICE trying to warn the country about this stuff for a long time.
If we are too quick to dismiss all of them as loyalists, the administration will be able to downplay any dissent when orders are refused, and possibly convince others who are on the fence that it’s in their best interest to comply bc the public is not on their side.
This is the actual reason why there is a 2nd amendment
If you thought overmilitarization of local police was bad, just wait until ICE gets tanks.
Yes, I understand that the 2nd amendment alone can’t stop a dictator if they have the army on their side… even though that was at least partly the intention when it was written
They believe the constitution should be interpreted to uphold the will of a leader/law and order over liberty of the people.
I’m not saying I disagree with you, just telling you what the legal argument will likely be when they arrest people or return force when people try to defend their home.
That argument JD Vance made about judges not having the authority to rule against executive decision is not his original argument. Adrian Vermeule is a Harvard constitutional law professor who has been making the argument favoring unchecked executive authority over all other government and executive power over liberty for a very long time.
Let’s fuck 'em up then.
Law and order? What are you smoking?
Following his orders = the law. He makes up the law, follow his orders.
That’s what dictators do.
Trump has always described himself as the law and order president
The argument of ivy league legal scholars that are helping run his administration is that the people elected the president. The president’s dutt is to do what he believes is best to protect the greatest number of people.
If Trump says that this is law now, and this law is necessary to protect the country, then individual liberty and rights will have to be secondary for the good of the country
The Harvard constitutional law professor that created this legal theory is a huge fan of Carl Schmitt.
Schmitt created the Nazi legal agenda using a similar legal argument which argued the will of the leader should be placed above all written law because it was best for Germany, making the German constitution basically useless.
This allowed Hitler to legally carry out genocide.
Such executive supremacy would really only work if the Leader is infallible, and only a simpleton would think such a person exists.
Many people find comfort in authoritarian personalities.
It’s also possible if you’re just willing to stop paying attention, and believe the people in power are doing what’s best for you. Trust them 😉
Thank you for explaining, and yes, I get all of that about how Trump and his intellectuals are claiming to be about law and order. My point was a more simple one: it can’t be about law and order if the president is above the law. Maybe we could use the term “order and law” instead, since they’re subjecting the law to the hierarchy of political power.
I mean they already are. They’ve been doing this since March.
The only reason we know is because one of the many employees within ICE who have been leaking information to the press in the hopes we would pressure congress to do their jobs, also leaked this.
If you know anyone in the conservative camp that’s still blissfully unaware/not pissed yet, loop them in. Their voices are the most important when it comes to giving Congress one last try while they’re still collecting paychecks paid for by our tax dollars.
If it comes down to us fighting we will have to join together anyway if we stand any chance. The next civil war will not be left vs right, it will be Americans refusing to follow orders vs. corporate billionaires controlling both public and private military (Blackwater, Palantir, etc.).
Hmm. Stand your ground against fascism.
So if they break into my home, I can shoot ‘em, right?
That’s my plan. Just upgraded my front door gun to something with a higher fire rate.
Is it aimed at your front door, or is the actual door a gun somehow?
In America, we make most things out of Gun™ for convenience.
Yeah, and thanks to our advancements in Gun™, my new giant truck gets a much better “zero to 60 Minutes” time than the old one.
Ethically, yes. Legally, they’ll just kill you.
Good, I don’t want to live in a fascist hellscape anyway.
Think of it a getting out early to avoid the rush.
I mean, if the alternative is getting shipped to a torture prison in El Salvador with no due process? Not saying it’s a good alternative, but it is an alternative.
One of these options gives a person -and possibly their families- a chance to get away. The other option sends them to Salvadorian prison.
I’m not American but I know which option I would take.
Legally? You can kill them as well.
You just have to claim that you thought it was self-defense against what appeared to be a black man jogging around your house.
So here is what I think. When you own a gun, you have to get a permit , right? (I believe so in all states). So you are on a registry. Trump knows who has guns and who doesn’t. Being the coward that he is, he will go after the most vulnerable people first.
This is his whole thing. Trafficking U.S citizens who are toddlers is first. Then hes going to expand like hes been doing.But back to gun ownership. He is gonna avoid homes with guns. At least at first. Just having a gun registered is going to deter him from sending in ICE or homeland. I think we already would have seen some gun violence with ICE at this point if he wasn’t intentionally having them avoiding gun owned homes.
I suggest, even if you are anti-gun or have no interest in owning a firearm. go ahead and get one now. Store it properly. Learn to use it properly and safely. But have it. Have a record you have it.
But I acknowledge this could bite you in the ass later. He may later give weapons to ICE and tell them when the house has a gun and tell them to go in shooting. Idk. Its hard to predict at this point. Still seems like getting a firearm is a good choice right now.
Rifles are more accurate than handguns. Slower to load but also do more damage. Less likely to be used for mass shootings or suicide. So rifles are probably the better choice. You could aim for a lower limb for injuring someone and be less likely to shoot them somewhere vital.
shotguns also not a terrible option. You can always do rocksalt shells. Not 100% non-lethal but typically less lethal than bullets. Shot guns best for closer range and they scatter. Precision aim not as necessary.
I am from the country where a lot of my family hunts (though I never did). I might be biased for rifles because to me they seem like the only gun that most people should even have.
There are also non lethal options tasers and gel pepper spray (gel kind only, dont use regular spray kind as its likely to go back to you).
As a non-violent person, i feel crazy for writing this stuff. but i also believe in being prepared. I mean, I carry pepper spray on myself when I am out walking at night by myself (I am a woman). Never thought in a million years I would be saying “get a gun to protect yourself from the government”. but my god, here we are.
Most states don’t require a permit, and most states didnt have laws about private sales for years so basically a bunch of guns can be traded that have no paperwork, the government doesn’t know who has guns anymore
Should be noted that some states actively forbid gun registration.
You are absolutely wrong that gun permits are necessary in all states. In Florida, the state Constitution actually prohibits gun permits/ registration. In fact, DeSatan recently lowered the age of gun ownership to 18, and removed the requirement for a 4 hour class in order to get a carry permit. So an 18 year old can just buy a gun, stick it in their waistband, and walk out of the store, totally legally.
The result of these laws, or lack of them, is that we just had a college campus shooting by an 18 year old. He was able to legally walk around with a gun without breaking the law, until he set foot on campus, where it is still prohibited. OTOH, the state legislature tries every year to pass a law that permits guns on college campuses, and new congressman Randy Fine just sponsored a bill to do that in February. Considering we just had a lethal campus shooting at FSU, its doubtful it will pass this year either.
The entire purpose of the USA’s second amendment is to protect the people from the government. There’s not supposed to be a standing army operating on local soil. Police, soldiers and ICE, ATF, DEA etc are the actual enemies at war with the population.
People keep saying this but it’s not really true. Right wingers say it when convenient (not now, gee wonder why they’re suddenly not making the argument). The second amendment was meant to allow citizens to form militias on behalf of the government, at a time that the country did not have a military.
You’re certainly free to have your own opinions but most of your assumptions shouldn’t be trusted by anyone else reading this.
It is possible to purchase and own firearms without a permit - typically just limited in form-factor and features (i.e. shotgun, no handguns or semi-auto rifles). And even when a (purchase) permit is required, that doesn’t necessitate there being a registry and frequently one is explicitly disallowed. It’s also possible to buy/trade firearms with private citizens (or 3d print/mill your own if especially crafty) which wouldn’t provide a record to anybody but the included parties. When you aren’t legally required to disclose you have a firearm it’s always better not to make that known. Besides the potential worries about a fascist government coming for them, there’s the concern that a list of firearm owners going public is a prime target for theft and break-ins.
Rifles aren’t necessarily “slower to load,” are you speaking specifically of bolt-action rifles with this? It’s about the same amount of time and steps to load a magazine into an AR15 rifle as it is a semi-auto pistol. Unfortunately that also makes them effective in an unlawful mass shooting situation.
If you feel a firearm is the proper solution to the situation you NEVER aim to wound or fire warning shots. It’s (presumably) always a life or death situation so you’re hoping for the most effective “fight stopping wounds” which is basically center mass of whatever you can see. Same thing with rock salt in a shotgun, it’s going to legally be seen the same as if you were firing shot/slugs so you shouldn’t treat it like something you can use just to scare something off. In close range, shotguns will have practically no spread unless you’re using an extremely cut-down barrel (typically cut to an illegal degree) - you still need to (and should be) direct aiming it and not wildly firing from the hip.
Rifles aren’t necessarily “slower to load,” are you speaking specifically of bolt-action rifles with this? It’s about the same amount of time and steps to load a magazine into an AR15 rifle as it is a semi-auto pistol. Unfortunately that also makes them effective in an unlawful mass shooting situation.
yeah but the rifle holds only a few rounds. so the time it takes per bullet is significantly longer for a rifle.
I’m guessing this comment will get edited out too for being under the wrong account but I’ll share my reply anyway:
Unless you specify what you mean by “rifle” that designation does include things like an AR15 with a 50+ round drum magazine that will load and fire bullets as fast as you can pull the trigger. If you are talking about something like a breech loading single shot rifle or a Carcano that is certainly true, but specificity is actually important when talking about firearms and related laws and it’s not just pedantry for the sake of nitpicking. It’s why gun people get anal about when people interchangeably use “assault rifle” and “assault weapon”, or claiming a firearm is “fully semi-automatic” - it’s important to use precise language because there’s vast differences in the various terms and concepts. Yes, generally it’s possible to discern from context that someone using the word “clip” to refer to a magazine-fed weapon isn’t using it literally, but if you want to try to speak authoritatively on the subject you should know what the difference is.
Which states just let you buy a gun with no background check or registration?
How are people convicted of owning unregistered firearms if registration isn’t required?
Isn’t there always a waiting period and a background check?
Felons aren’t allowed to buy or own guns.
Which states just let you buy a gun with no background check or registration?
I’m not going to check current status of every state’s laws, but I did already address it’s possible to buy guns from places other than a licensed firearm dealer and required registration is less common than not. In private sales you’re at a minimum legally required to not intentionally sell to prohibited people but clearly that isn’t always obeyed - it’s possible some states require you to then register that transaction in some way but that’s not the default expectation/requirement everywhere.
How are people convicted of owning unregistered firearms if registration isn’t required?
People can be convicted if they are in a location or have prohibited items that DO require registration and they aren’t. Suppressors or short-barreled rifles/shotguns and full-auto firearms being common examples.
Isn’t there always a waiting period and a background check?
In my state, with a permit to purchase (good for 1 year, no qty limits) or a permit to carry (5 years, no qty limits) there is no waiting period. If buying from a licensed FFL there is still a NICS check with each purchase though.
Felons aren’t allowed to buy or own guns.
Correct. Felons also aren’t known for obeying the law so just being prohibited doesn’t ensure they can’t obtain a firearm.
If you’re worried about an attacker at your door, get a shotgun. Rifles are for when you can aim at a target at distance, pistols for when you can aim at close range. If you can’t confidently aim at your target, a shotgun is very effective, even with only a partial hit. (And, if you miss, the shot is unlikely to significantly harm an innocent bystander.)
Also, most states don’t require registration. My state is a little weird in that they are avoiding registering firearms, so they make you register transactions.
I would recommend the VR80 12-gauge shotgun. It is semi-automatic with magazines, which is pretty important if you are dealing with more than one trafficker. Plus, it is built on the AR-15 platform, which might be handy if warfare breaks out. If things get hot in that fashion, having mods could make it easier to engage at range.
Get a 12 gauge… The chachink of shotgun is a sound that sends chills up people’s spines
