“I’m gonna start killing people” if Obama issues exec order

James Yeager, the CEO of Tactical Response, a Tennessee company that specializes in weapons and tactical training, posted a video on Facebook and YouTube yesterday, detailing what he’ll do if President Obama issues any executive orders on gun control:

“I”m not f’g putting up with this… if it goes one inch further, I’m gonna start killing people.”

This is who the NRA represents.  Nutjobs.  Anarchists.  Violent far-right extremists who live every day in mortal fear that the commies, or the Nazis (to them they’re the same), are coming to take their dear beloved country away from them.  They’re crazy.  They’re dangerous.  They’re a hair-trigger away from going literally ballistic, and far too many fries short of a happy meal.

These guys don’t love their guns because of “tradition,” or some lofty high-minded love of the Constitution. They love their guns because they’re black helicopter conspiracy nuts. They are the very people who probably should be on the bottom of the list of those permitted to buy guns in the first place.  And they are the best argument around for why this country isn’t mature enough to handle the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.

They are the NRA.

PS This guy says his store is for police and military, among others.  I’d love to know what police department, and military members, are supporting this guy.

(H/t Crooks and Liars)

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

122 Responses to ““I’m gonna start killing people” if Obama issues exec order”

  1. Dufrain Galt says:

    John Aravosis is a brainwashed drone who lacks the ability to think critically. This opinion piece is filled with generalizations and stereotypes and nowhere based on factual data. Fact is the vast majority of mass shootings are committed by people heavily associated with the Left. And this is not hyperbole, but outright fact. Newtown, Virginia Tech, Ft. Hood, Arizona (Gabby Giffords), Colorado 1 and 2…. were all carried out by people with strong Left Leaning Ideals. Add to this Timmothy McVeigh, and the Boston Marathon Bombers and you’ll see that the left breeds hate and disregard for the lives and safety of their fellow citizens.

  2. Barbara Burr says:

    our country use to be pretty nice but the crazy’s began the process of destroying it. they are the reason that crazy SOB can exist in his crazy world. you do know that our country began to go down hill because of Rupert Murdock and he went to work with his Fox net work on the simple minded full of hate people and that is when it began. you may think i am wrong but i have watched that man and it came to me there really is an anti Christ and it is Rupert Murdock. that is what started the end of america. did you know the tea party republiocans want people in nursing homes helpless and very old to get up get out of bed and go to work. they feed into Murdocks hate spreading.

  3. Not gonna say says:

    If the guy who wrote this blog is John Aravosis i would look at where he worked before you agree with anything this guy says to make the CEO of TNGUNS look crazy, psychotic or irrational. It would be normal for someone who is apart of the world bank or has worked for the world bank to be against a revolution and a revolution can only happen when the citizens are not disarmed and defenseless. I also am afraid of what my Governments true intentions may be

  4. blynn52 says:

    Gun nuts like this have very little penises.

  5. Phil Perron says:

    HE HAS SINCE BEEN VISITED & HIS CARRY PERMIT HAD BEEN TAKEN AWAY…Big deal! The dude owns a gun shop…They can’t keep him from carrying on his private property. There is a way to & not to fight fight….he has clearly chosen to take the path of the way NOT to. Talk about giving us all a bad name….Thanks alot nut job!

  6. He has just enough brains to keep the “Stainless Banner” out of camera range, I reckon.

  7. SettingAside says:

    Your violent comment should be reported to the authorities before you do something so heinous as you recommend.

  8. Setting Aside says:

    Shameful how the writer of this article and many posters here are prejudiced against all NRA members, gun owners, gun enthusiasts, and those who support the 2nd Amendment. Your comments and this article which lump all of the above into the same group as James Yeager, are reminiscent of how other tyrants and tyrannical groups historically managed to get gun control and then eliminate those with whom they disagree. Future generations then wonder how such exterminations took place. Paul Harvey once did a study and discovered that 56 million people were murdered by their own governments after their governments took away their right to bear arms. Harvey said that “We should learn from the mistakes of history. The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.” Please do the research.

  9. Petey says:

    Feel sorry for this whackjobs neighbors…

  10. JamesR says:

    Sorry for replying so late I have been away in the Real World for a busy week. And, frankly, then became curious as to what specifics might be in the O’Biden plan.

    Not a lotta details. And we all know that’s where the Devil actually lives.

    If this sparks a REAL debate of what we can do as opposed to what we really can’t (practically and politically) then some good can come out of it. For both ‘sides’ as there is really only ONE side, that of a peaceful population.

    But issues must be defined, quantified if they can be. And when one political side ponies up with specifics.

    “Assault weapon” is being used, it would seem, in the Clinton assault weapon ban definition, which is Byzantine, there are some additions in the new ones floated, Obama has not weighed in on what he might prefer. Weird for anyone other than Obama. Throw in “universal background check” is doublespeak for universal registration tracking and cataloging all private sales (not the ‘vastly improved and streamlined Federal system’ he could have already executively ordered.) A ten round magazine limit as ‘hunters don’t need any more than that’ is a red herring as there are some situations where assault style semi-automatic firearms with those ‘inappropriate’ magazines ARE effective for self defense. No, they’re NOT for hunting, but for defense – so at what point do you limit a citizen’s right to defend himself? – it’s a bit of a mess, and all of a sudden. Thoughtful debate might hash out something reasonable, if we could have it.

    But I am sure this will all be continued on more active new and future threads.

  11. Kill the gun owners before they kill again.

  12. JMerklin says:

    NO! This is exactly why the law abiding citizens NEED to carry guns. We will be there long before the police whenever an idiot law breaker starts to shoot. Citizens with guns strapped to their sides is also a deterrent to idiots like Yeager. Long live the 2nd ammendment. Our forefathers knew better than the idiots who are trying to take our guns. If someone like Yeager started to shoot people, it would take the police 5 to 10 minutes to arrive to “protect” us. But if someone like Yeager started to shoot people, then citizens like me would shoot him immediately, saving innocent lives.

    No Merry – YOU ARE WRONG……

  13. Mo'Daaka says:

    Yeah, and his little popgun will be upgraded to a poop-gun. AH HA

  14. Mo'Daaka says:

    Yeah, and so did Cuba. Remember the “Mariellitos”

  15. JMerklin says:

    I’m sorry – but you have the right to take up arms against the government if the government is tyrinical. See here – from a JUDGE.. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/10/judge-napolitano-second-amendment-protects-your-right-shoot-tyrants/?utm_source=feedburner

  16. Merry says:

    Mr. Yeagar is EXACTLY why we need stricter gun laws; immediately! Score one for the non gun lovers of the country dum-dum. And what exactly is a “Tenessee CEO”? Does it means his owns his mobile home outright?

  17. Brought to you by the nanny state of NY, where you need permission to buy a soda, get a prescription while at a hospital, and where the Mayor of NYC wants to ban guns as he hides behind his armed guards. For what its worth, microstamping is not inexpensive and be easily defeated with a dremel tool.

  18. What’s common sense about a ban that disarms good people but fails to address criminals? What happened at Sandy Hook was horrible but to base sweeping national gun laws on a statistically insignificant event is folly. AR style rifles represent less than 1% of homicides.We need a discussion on funding mental health. We need a national system of background checks that include private sales at gun shows. We also need to free the residents of Wash. D.C. and all those in Illinois.

  19. To protect you, the SWAT Team would need to arrive about twenty minutes before the first shot is fired. The police are there to write reports AFTER an event. Do you think maybe you ought to take a role in your own defense?

  20. kurtsteinbach says:

    Ray, the expiration of the AWB does not preclude the Commerce Dept from regulating firearms sales under Presidential Executive Order. President Obama is a lawyer who knows better than you what the Constitution allows and does not allow. I too am a historian who studied the Constitution. Congress not renewing a law ends that law, but no further. To go further, Congress would have to prohibit the Commerce Dept. from regulating gun sales with specific legislation, and considering the GOP cannot get a party consensus (Hastert rule that they still want to abide by; it’s why they won’t bring things to a vote that Boehner wants passed and COULD get with Democratic help). 218 votes need to pass something in the House, Democrats are 202 of those votes. There will be gun regulation, and much of it may go through Congress. Within the limits of the law and using the Elastic, Necessary and Proper, and Commerce Clauses, the President can do much. President Bush, Bush and Reagan and the GOP Congress did much to ensure this during the 1980s and from January 1995 – December of 2006.

  21. Michigan allows Open Carry in school zones. We have not had a mass shooting at a school. Connecticut has an AWB. Did that save anyone at Sandy Hook? Columbine happened when the od AWB was still in effect. How did that play out?
    As for the need for 30 round magzines (which are standard issue on civilian AR 15 style rifles), you show a complete lack of understanding what a law abbiding might face in a home invasion. Will a crew of several bad guys come with 5 shot revolvers? What about the police? When they finally arrive, what will they bring for protecting and repelling the bad guys? Cops will bring AR 15s, exactly like the one I bought at a Sporting Goods store. Why should I have less protection while I wait?

  22. Under the Constitution, it is not lawful to MAKE laws using the Exec. Orders process. A President may also NOT go against existing laws. Congress has spoken on Assault Bans by declining to extend the 1994 AWB. Congress has spoken in the National Firearms Act of 1934 and strictly defined which weapons are Title II and need ATF approval and a $200 tax stamp. AWB do not work. This is hysteria at work, AR style rifles killed 323 people in 2012, hammer attacks killed several dozen more.

  23. kurtsteinbach says:

    This is a good gun regulation idea from NY DAs:

    is an inexpensive and effective tool to solve – and deter – gun trafficking and
    other crimes by etching a unique code onto the firing pin and breech face of a
    semi-automatic handgun. This code is then transferred onto the cartridge casing
    each time the gun is fired, which allows law enforcement to quickly determine
    the gun’s purchaser. Both DAASNY and the New York State Law Enforcement Council have long supported microstamping.

  24. kurtsteinbach says:

    As of today, January 11, 2013, James Yeager has had his gun permit confiscated by the state of Tennessee. Surrender of his guns will come next. He also needs to be on the terrorism watch list and no fly list. He needs to be arrested and undergo a psychiatric evaluation. He needs to be barred from ever owning a gun again, ever.

    “Robert Spitzer, a political scientist who studies gun politics and
    chairs the political science department at SUNY Cortland, told Mother
    Jones’ Gavin Aronsen that the prohibition on Jewish gun ownership was
    merely a symptom, not the problem itself. “[It] wasn’t the defining moment
    that marked the beginning of the end for Jewish people in Germany. It
    was because they were persecuted, were deprived of all of their rights,
    and they were a minority group,” he explained”

    Our gun problem in this country is a symptom of a larger problem and crazies like Mr. Yeager are part of the problem. They are part of a culture of violence and a gun culture that glorifies violence that is advocated by the 25% of NRA members who are against any reasonable regulation on guns. People with gun use them to kill people, and regulations are needed to regulate the behavior of those crazy people and keep crazy people from having guns.75% of NRA members are for reasonable gun control. The other 25% along with the NRA leadership need to address the problems surrounding gun violence instead of trying to act and sound crazier than those who are crazier than they are.

  25. kurtsteinbach says:

    Watch that word “sedition” though, FLL. There has often been a fine line between sedition and free speech. Remember that John Peter Zenger was accused and tried for sedition among other charges. Inciting to riot or violence is much more descriptive than sedition.

  26. kurtsteinbach says:

    Taking up arms against the government of the U.S. is treason, and is punishable by death. You have the right to free speech; the right to peacefully protest, the right to petition, the right print your disagreements, and the right to vote. You DO NOT have the right to take up arms against the government. Per the Supreme Court under Oliver Wendall Holmes and a century of concurring decisions, you do not have a right to threatening speech or behavior. This idiot nut who is the subject of this article now also has a right to a visit from the U.S Marshals, the FBI, or TBI though. Washington personally lead the militia against the Whiskey Rebellion and Lincoln went to war because taking up arms against the government is illegal, and you do NOT have the right to do so. He may have the right to the inside of a prison though, if he progresses past bad hyperbole, and so do you!

  27. Jason B says:

    As an Australian who is far-removed from what is going on in your country, I am so relieved to see comments like yours. All too often all I see is the gun-nut brigade and their comments.

    Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for helping to remind me and those like me that there are still rational, sensible people in the U.S.

    I wish you all the best, and hope that you and your fellow citizens soon get to live in a (albeit only slightly) safer country.

  28. FLL says:

    I’m no expert on weapons technology, and I agree that anyone in Congress has the task of doing exactly what your asking: defining their terms. I suspect that nobody in Congress will try to include modern semi-automatic hunting weapons, since they are commonly used in hunting or self defense. My guess is that, at the moment, people in Congress are concentrating on weapons with such great combat application that they could be used to hold off (or sometimes even overpower) local law enforcement. But you’re right, congressional legislators have to define their terms concerning any ban on “assault rifles.” What exactly do they consider assault rifles? My standard would be if a reasonable person considers the intended purpose of a weapon to be use in combat or civil unrest, in which case, you’re trying to use these weapons to overpower lots of other people who are armed, like the local authorities.

  29. JamesR says:

    All firearms began as weapons of war. Every significant technological innovation incorporated into modern hunting and defense weaponry began as military technology.

    For the sake of argument can you define what you mean by “assault weapn” and can you define the specific differences between that and a modern semi-automatic hunting or self defense gun?? There is much data extant concerning the effectiveness and situational appropriateness of semi-automatic weaponry used in self defense, much written by the police even. Used safely, by citizens who are trained properly and know and obey the law.

    [I am not defending nor agreeing with anything “FUCK YOU john aravosis” said, “wrong” has many definitions and James Yeager did many of them all at once with one video.]

    Certainly amassing a cache of weapons with the intent of overthrowing our government, or threatening lawmakers or agents of the government enacting lawful and constitutional orders is treason and sedition. BUT do you have a line, a definable line, that your prohibited weaponry is on the one side and ‘legitimate’ self defense and hunting weaponry is on the other side of? What weapons, exactly, are you talking about?

  30. Tennessee Progressive says:

    He made the local news last night – turns out he isn’t a certified instructor and his school is not “department-certified” AND he is “trying” to tamp down some of what he said. I would imagine the TBI, FBI, CIA, IRS, Homeland Security and Secret Service all now have this guy on the radar and he will be receiving visits and thorough background checks on his business and other dealings…

  31. FLL says:

    Assault weapons are weapons of warfare, not for protecting your family or home. The only purpose for weapons of warfare is war, for example, civil war or violent overthrow of our elected government. That’s sedition and treason, which are not protected by the Second Amendment. You want to amass an arsenal just in case you don’t like the results of the last election? FU too, traitor. That’s treason.

  32. FUCK YOU john aravosis says:

    in case anyone here forgot that they are Americans, it is your duty to defend the constitution. so this guy has done nothing wrong other than let people know that he will uphold the law unlike the people trying to ban guns.

  33. Solomon Davidson says:

    James Yeager’s threat to be on the verge of launching a murder spree should certainly be the focus of law enforcement from local police to the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms as well as the Secret Service. Yeager should not be allowed to come into the presence of the Vice-President or the President. Yeager appears to be self-confessedly armed and dangerous.

  34. common sense says:

    that dude is crazy. he needs to be paid a visit by the cops. but this article is propaganda. i am pro second amendment. i’m not crazy. i’m not violent. i just firmly believe in my right to defend myself. i know the difference between ‘commies’ and nazis, but when someone says that someone is a nazi or a commie, they are talking about the idea that the person believes in authoritarianism.
    ‘our’ government certainly has claimed the authority to torture and kill anyone it wants just because it wants to, to spy on people just because they can, they are constantly trying to regulate the internet. this is just the beginning. this nation certainly is resembling a dictatorship more and more each day. there is no doubt about that. you SHOULD be mad, but you should NOT be making threats to hurt innocent people.

  35. nobonesl says:

    Has he got a “kill” list, or what?

  36. Badgerite says:

    You know, we have good guys with guns. They are called the SWAT Team. And I count on them to protect me from people like this. If this is what the NRA has become, then they have become a terrorist organization at heart. They want the whole country to live in fear of them. The killing of school children doesn’t upset this guy. What upsets him is that the government might keep him from stockpiling anymore Bushmasters.

  37. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Maybe it’s not worthy of being smuggled, just too damn little.

  38. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Oh no! Not that!

  39. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    All US citizens huh? That would include paroled felons and the mentally ill. If I were you, I’d stock up on aluminum foil. You’ll need it for hats.

  40. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Actually Ed is a good choice. He does go hunting, so he has a rifle. He’s just against citizens having assault rifles.

  41. kurtsteinbach says:

    Also, gun free zones such as ALL school campuses, colleges included, make it so that even having a weapon on a school campus without being law enforcement or authorization is a Federal Offense with 5-10 years or more in prison just for carrying the weapon there. Gun Free Zones are usually Schools, Courthouses, State Houses, the White House, Governor’s Mansions, City Hall, Congress, SCOTUS, etc. In other words, places where learning or civil discourse needs to be able to happen without the threat of being shot. The entire point of such zones are to allow such places to keep functioning without coercion, the kind of coercion that becomes inherent when one or more parties is/are armed. If people feel threatened, then our democracy cannot survive. Guns need to stay out of those places. Those in those places who do have guns (Secret Service types) are there to protect those who are doing those vital things. Generally, the Secret Service does not participate in the discussion, the cop at City Hall either checks his firearm, or he/she is their as a police officer and not for a hearing or other civil function. We cannot let extremists encroach any further on civil society. Prevent them from getting guns by prohibiting guns to those who cannot or do not treat them with respect and reverence; those who are a danger to themselves or others, and those who would use them to settle arguments instead of civil discourse. Most NRA members and most gun owners can agree that responsible gun owners know how to handle a gun properly (if you don’t know how to handle a gun, then you need a class). Most gun owners can agree that felons should not have guns and should give up the ones they have upon conviction. The mentally ill should not have guns. There is no need to have a 30 shot magazine, a weapon that fires multiple rounds when the trigger is squeezed, or any other type of weapon that is rapid fire and would shred whatever your hunting or easily kill large masses of people (I express it like this because definitions of “assault weapon” varies).

  42. “The NRA does not “represent” people like this”

    Of course they do!

    Do ya actually think that sane people would fall for their bullshit?

  43. FLL says:

    People who use guns to commit crimes are U.S. citizens too. If you make it mandatory that all U.S. citizens have concealed firearms, and criminals are U.S. citizens, then why would that make the crime rate drop. I’m just trying to be helpful and get you to work on your argumentation skills. Think this one through again.

  44. labman57 says:

    Poster child for the gun-toting “law-abiding citizen” frequently touted by the NRA.

  45. ricks2 says:

    These nuts call themselves patriots. These gun nuts don’t want to compromise on common sense gun laws.

  46. GoBlue says:

    Dontcha love how these “patriots” keep proving their total ignorance of American history? Specifically, the ONLY reason the 13 colonies were able to win the Revolutionary War was that France, which had plenty of reasons to dislike Great Britain, decided to join the war on the colonies’ side.

    If the NRA wants to start a war over the “right” of every American to assemble his or her personal arsenal, they shouldn’t expect any help from France.

  47. Outspoken1 says:

    I agree – It is my understanding that most Police Officers (and related law enforcement officials) greatest fear is the perp taking their weapon and killing them.

  48. Randy Riddle says:

    Amazing what guys will say when they think the government is going to take away their penis.

  49. FLL says:

    Seems like so much of this sentiment is centered in Tennessee. The Tennessee office of the FBI really has their work cut out for them.

  50. BeccaM says:

    Somewhere in the depths of time and space, your former grade school English language and grammar teachers are weeping.

  51. TheOriginalLiz says:

    Probably not. He’s an unstable white man – they seem to be the good guys.

  52. karmanot says:

    Incredible! This nut has been invited to be on the Ed Show MSNBC.

  53. I suspect a devious relative or spiteful acquaintance would be a better explanation. :)

  54. JamesR says:

    Investigating Anarchy’s Wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy (LOL) I found an interesting entry about Kant’s four theories of government (paraphrased:)

    Law And Freedom without Violence = Anarchy
    Law And Violence without Freedom = Despotism
    Violence without Freedom And Law = Barbarism
    Violence with Freedom And Law = Republic

    I’d always associated Anarchy with Libertarianism (which of course without certain State power to enforce protective law defaults to oligarchy and / or despotism posthaste.) I don’t see how the violence can be removed, until the whole of society and all it’s groups stop it, on their own.

    Until then we’re stuck with the Res Publica. But if we think of it like a gentle anarchy perhaps our attitude towards power and the State might make both better. ?

  55. JamesR says:

    History has been written by the victors, none of whom have been anarchists!

  56. lynchie says:

    Take all the nuts that prove the left right and still there will be no changes because Congress is owned.

  57. kurtsteinbach says:

    As far as the President issuing Executive Orders goes, he has the right and the duty to do so under the Constitution of the U.S. in accordance with the regulation of commerce. Background checks, Assault weapons regulations, magazine regulation, mental health checks, mandatory comparison of gun licenses with the terrorist watch list (FBI) and similar regulations would all be allowed as regulations on commerce. From the time I was a little boy, we were taught on TV that if you see a gun, do not touch it (fingerprints [it might have been used in a crime]), tell an adult (call a cop)because nobody leaves a gun in the street). Guns are expensive. Would you leave $100 in the street? N, so it’s suspicious when you find a gun in the trash or in the gutter. Always assume a gun is loaded. When you do store it; put the safety on (if it has one); take the clip out (or the bullets out of the cylinder if a revolver), take the round out of the chamber. DO NOT under any circumstances stare down the barrel.

  58. lynchie says:

    Short walk from talking about it and doing it.

  59. kingstonbears says:

    Lovely, just ‘effin lovely.

  60. lynchie says:

    You sir are full of shit. Take a minute and study history. In the meantime send the $1.50 back to the NRA for posting here.

  61. lynchie says:

    Don’t forget Mario Cumuo in New York he was complicit as well. We have to address Mental Illness and the way to do it is to open institutions. We have thousands of vets suffering from PTSD both from Iraq/Iran and Vietnam who are ticking time bombs. We have thousands of young people who grew up with little social skills, education and no jobs and they are watching their 50 year old fathers being laid off with little opportunity for a real job. As I said above the spring on all these types is getting tighter and tighter and our President hasn’t mentioned jobs since the election campaign and he is pre-occupied with spending millions on his gala crowning and killing people on the other side of the world for breakfast.

  62. kurtsteinbach says:

    Tennessee legislature is introducing a bill to allow teachers to carry concealed weapons in schools. I am a teacher and I do NOT want this. I DO NOT want my teacher colleagues carrying guns. Memphis City Schools has police officers in schools. They are unarmed. They are unarmed so that a student cannot grab the guns police usually carry and start shooting. Even an armed cop could not stop it if someone opens fire in the halls, say when classes are changing, at least not without risking hitting kids. I do not want a teacher in this situation. Keep schools as gun free zones. It makes it so that teachers are teachers and not armed guards. The only time armed personnel enter a school is to meet a threat. If there is a shooter, a lockdown occurs and the halls are cleared. Armed trained officers would then go in.

  63. JamesR says:

    Do you think everyone should be required to vote too?

  64. jar says:

    But what institution? Didn’t Reagan close down the mental hospitals and release all inmates to the streets?

  65. Haviva says:

    This guy needs to have the FBI crawling up his ass!

  66. Budda Guy says:

    John Aravosis is a nut job and needs to have his head examined over this article. mass murder’s agree that gun control works … they love disarmed peasents… just ask stalin, mao, and hitler. if we looked back on history the civilian populations we decimated by these mad men. the main reason was because they could not fight back … they had no guns. our gov’t has been bought they no longer uphold their obligation to the people only to money. how a bout what our gov’t did breaking into every home in new orleans with out warrant to take guns away from people in their homes :

    our founding fathers understood the reality of tyrants that is why they made the 2nd amendment. any law or executive order contrary to the constitution and the bill of rights is a violation of the presidents obligation to office and he should be impeached.

    if it were up to me i would make it mandatory that all us citizens have a licensed concealed firearm at all times. see how fast the crime rate drops … only the idiots will kill them selves this country will be better in the long run for it.

  67. BeccaM says:

    Excellent post, and a very good point to make.

    Anarchy, as a philosophy, does not equal violence. I think people confuse violent, irresponsible lawless behavior with anarchism far too often.

  68. karmanot says:


  69. karmanot says:

    Yes, ironically

  70. karmanot says:

    Scary Mr. boing boing eyes

  71. JamesR says:

    People like this are scared. Lots of money is being made on the fear too. Lots of people are stoking it, for lots of different reasons. On both sides. (This guy is the poster guy for scaring people, again, on both sides.)

    Fear and uncertainty – uncertainty because Obama has NO record on firearms issues, as President. Virtually none. So nobody – Left or Right – knows what he’s really gonna do, if anything. So both sides are cranking up fear, and people reacting like this is what we get. Not that I’m justifying what he said in the least nor blaming anyone but him for his actions – but it’s a product of fear. (And the product of living in a bubble, which some on both sides do.)

    Obama needs to pull the bandaid off quiick and say the limits of what he’s considering so as to stop the speculation or more words, more threats, more fear, will begin to rule the day.

  72. Mighty says:

    I wonder if he is now on the Terrorist watch list or at least having all his communications monitored by the FBI. He has said he has lots of support.

  73. OH wait. This is Tennessee? Pick him up NOW.

  74. JamesR says:

    Given that, his fear of executive overreach is justified.

    [What he did with that fear is not.]

  75. I’m not sure he means it but I’m sure he wants people to think he means it.

  76. a gentle anarchist says:

    I know this is a little bit off topic, but please do not equate Anarchy with people like this. Doing so is no less ignorant (and damaging) than the equating socialism with fascism, or Obama with Hitler. This man is not an Anarchist, he’s an asshole. I guaranty he does not support the two central tenants of all forms of Anarchism–rejection of all forms of hierarchy and respect for the autonomy of others. By threatening to start killing people, this asshole is not threatening to unleash Anarchy, but Chaos. Anarchy is not the Greek word for Chaos–Chaos is the Greek word for Chaos. Anarchy is the Greek word for “without a ruler;” it is contrasted with Monarchy (one ruler) and Oligarchy (a few rulers). Direct Democracy is Anarchy in practice–hardly the same as threatening to kill people with whom you disagree.

  77. Mike Meyer says:

    YAH–GITMO-GITMO-GITMO, he could share a waterboard with Go Daddy. AND WHY NOT-WE’ve walked so far from The Constitution at this point, might as well just lock up everybody WE don’t like in GITMO, saves money on those private prisons and court costs too. With Castro getting so old and all WE could turn ALL of Cuba into OUR OWN Devil’s Island. One giant not-so-federal-penitentiary, no Habeas, no Judges, No jury,—ONLY Obama.

    As far as guns go—can’t steal The Red Man’s land unless ya got guns.
    Deadly Kwob has the right answer below, although this guy DOES need looking into by the authorities over this kind of threat, passing him off as the NRA Poster Boy, just makes the left start to look like right wing propagandists.

  78. arcadesproject says:

    So. Has James Yeager been invited to the prayer breakfast yet?

  79. BeccaM says:

    I’ll be charitable: May this man receive the mental health treatment he so obviously needs, before he actually does kill someone.

  80. Steroids and guns aren’t a good mix especially when mixed with an ignorant coward like that badly tattooed simpleton.

  81. This sub-human just proved that he is not stable enough to own any firearms.

  82. karmanot says:

    He will take his little popgun to prison.

  83. karmanot says:

    Opps.Oh Well.

  84. karmanot says:

    The President has taken the right to kill anyone, anywhere without trial or hearing if he considers them a threat. Just wait until a drone takes out that double-wide Tenn. trailer.

  85. karmanot says:

    He better double down on a tin foil hat, because drones have no mercy.

  86. nicho says:

    Yeah, in prison, you have to smuggle them in — or make your own.

  87. nicho says:

    I support the second amendment too. Join a well-regulated government militia and you get a gun.

  88. SkippyFlipjack says:

    to play devil’s advocate, this guy would say that congress makes laws, and that executive orders fall outside that structure

  89. jomicur says:

    Because gun owners are all sane, responsible citizens.

  90. AnitaMann says:

    Sounds like someone could use a nice soothing cup of chamomile tea and a STFU sandwich.

  91. Steven Jaeger says:

    more likely since he has a penis substitute he can use a toothpick (which I bet he has a lot of) and sewing thread.

  92. mucholderguy says:

    Sounds like a good conservative to me. A little extreme… but still a good conservative. And he sure looks the part too!

  93. Joe Carlin says:

    Before purchasing a gun, please check with your doctor to see if male enhancement is right for you.

  94. Joe Carlin says:

    If two people are both “standing their ground” on territory, someone is going to get shot. Heads I win, tails you lose.

  95. Joe Carlin says:

    If only that school had armed guards! Oh wait, it did.

  96. Joe Carlin says:

    Isn’t the president’s job to execute the laws? Isn’t it always the argument that “we have plenty of laws, we just need to enforce them”? So……. isn’t that the president’s job?

  97. Joe Carlin says:

    Easy there, Timothy McVeigh.

  98. Naja pallida says:

    That’s generally the traditional definition.

  99. Carl Gorney says:

    None of that will happen.

  100. CSStrowbridge says:

    I want the CIA to pay him a little visit, take him for a little trip, and drop him in Gitmo.

  101. Bill_D_Cat says:

    He’s going to be sad when he finds out he can’t take his little popguns to prison.

  102. cberry says:

    I support the 2nd amendment, but that imbecilic turd needs to be in a jail cell ASAP

  103. Ken Daniels says:

    I don’t ask this as a joke – this guy is known to be armed at all times, makes his living as a master of the art of combat and killing (to the point where he teaches it to others), and is now making very public threats of killling people. TN is a “stand your ground” state – what happens if another TN citizen, with a “reasonable fear” for his safety, shoots this idiot and then claims self defense? After all, this seems like much more of a danger than one kid with skittles and another in the backseat of a car with a loud stereo.

  104. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    He mentioned patriots. Anybody doubt that means white, Anglo-Saxon, protestant?

  105. Jafafa Hots says:

    Somehow ten years ago I ended up with a “subscription” to Tactical Response, and though I’ve never paid a cent or renewed and have moved 4 times, I still keep getting it.

    Creepy, I’m on some list this guy has or something.

  106. mirror says:

    This is the main point I make now when it comes up or I post somewhere. The NRA represents gun makers and they love killings, killings of any kind, because every killing feeds the paranoid fantasies of the gun nuts, who then buy more guns. And the gun nuts love the killing because they grasp each one as a proof for their weird helpless victim self-identity.

    The NRA sees the Sandy Hook as an awesome seasonal promotional event that pushed purchases of their product through the roof while other sales were flat.

  107. Kelvin Mace says:

    Oh, and the NRA represents arms makers. These loons are exploited by the NRA to goose gun sales.

  108. Kelvin Mace says:

    I think this is probable cause to haul this guy in for a psych eval

  109. explody says:

    Please don’t lump “anarchists” in with violent nutjobs like this. It’s misinformed and misleading.

  110. Island In The Sky says:

    He’s going to start killing people?

    He should start with HIMSELF.

  111. Anon says:

    “I’d love to know what police department, and military members, are supporting this guy.” FOIA the DoD, FBI, etc. Then start filing FOIA’s with the nearby sheriffs and police. There’d be a huge paper trail if it’s true.

  112. Deadly Kwob says:

    The NRA does not “represent” people like this. They are just exploiting these people in order to gain numbers, donations, and political influence.

    The NRA has essentially become an advocacy group for the gun manufacturing industry. They are promoting certain myths that seem silly to us but people like this guy eat them up. Obama is coming for your guns, guns increase public safety, having a gun is a talisman that can diffuse a bad situation, having a gun makes you “a man,” etc. The effect of these myths is to raise demand for guns and sell more.

    They have also pushed assault rifles in place of more reasonable guns because assault rifles are more profitable for the gun makers.

  113. Jersey says:

    This unstable idiot should be in an institution getting the psychiatric help he obviously needs.

  114. nicho says:

    Viagra provides strength, but not length.

  115. Oh that’s a guarantee.

  116. Carl Gorney says:

    John: That’s not the ONLY agency that needs to pay that idiot a visit.

    The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, the Benton County sheriffs, etc. etc ad nauseaum should be put ON NOTICE: Visit him. Make him explain himself. Don’t let him off the hook.

  117. GoBlue says:

    This IS the sort of rant that usually prompts the Secret Service to pay a house call.

  118. Hey, if he loses one or two of his guns, there’s always Viagra…

  119. Sure sounds like one to me. Oh, trust me, that guy is getting a visit from the Secret Service. But it really goes farther than the usual threat. This guy said outright that he’s going to start killing people if the president signs any executive order. That’s extortion in addition to a terrorist threat against the president.

  120. lynchie says:

    We need more guns. Another shooting today in California High School. The spring on a lot of these ass blankets gets wound tighter and tighter. These types all think they are so macho, they are not going to take it anymore, they are going to kill. What does it take to put a few of them in an institution because they are a danger to others.

  121. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Isn’t that a terroristic threat? Law enforcement needs to be looking into that.

  122. Buford says:

    “… and I’m kinda mad right now…”. I agree, but not sure my definition of ‘mad’ is the same as his.

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS