In the comment section of "A Line In The Sand?" I received this comment:
My response to each charge is below the italics, it was not a conversation.
They are not laws with which we disagree they are clearly unconstitutional. There is no provision whatsoever in the Second Amendment for infringement of any kind. That these laws are in place and are being prosecuted already proves that the officers are Oathbreakers. It doesn't have to do with this law, it has to do with the fact that they have never stood up when the first round of gun laws were passed. I don't recall anyone suggesting that the officers be assaulted. The worst I heard was that they should be encouraged to rethink their oath and whether they were abiding by it. At worst, however, those were empty threats in an online forum not something to be considered a valid, palpable threat.
When the flash-bang comes through your window, you'll have about 2 seconds to prepare yourself for eternity. That will be a good day.
So, for a few empty threats and hyperbole it is the conclusion of "Anonymous" that we should be flash-banged and killed. Killed. For writing words in the heat of emotion at the excesses and abuses of the government. Because we feel angry about a veteran getting a raw deal by police officers, we should be killed. By whom? The police. The commenter suggests that if the police were to come into our homes without any warning, set off a flash bang and summarily shoot us for writing these words, it would be a just killing. A just killing because we spoke out, because we expressed our horror at what? Police abuses and excess.
Irony, don't you love it?
But, this only illustrates the issues on a larger scale. We, in the patriot/liberty community, believe that police powers have been granted in way too many ways in our lives; that police powers have been extended to federal officials who do not have the training or sensitivity of a local police department responsible to the people. We believe that the Constitutional rights we have are inalienable and that any law restricting a right is illegal. Otherwise one must argue that slavery is allowable by certain local jurisdictions. We believe that we have a right to due process, not summary execution. We believe that to enter a home one must produce a warrant.
Anonymous does not. By this comment Anonymous believes that the police should have the power to flash bang and kill anyone who speaks out against police or an unjust law. The last I heard in order for a threat of any kind to violate the law it has to be made out against a particular individual and the person making the threat has to have motive and opportunity to do so. Even then, even if any of that were true, which it is not, it is a charge worthy of bringing against an individual, not a group and certainly not cause to use a flash bang to disorient the suspect and to summarily execute him.
If this is indeed the attitude of police officers across the nation; if it is seen by them as a justifiable action to take against bloggers and those who comment on their blogs, then we are already much too far behind the curve, because we live in a complete and total police state and there is just cause and reason to rebel.
The sad part is, there are many in the law enforcement community who feel exactly as Anonymous does. It is what makes this struggle important. It is why we cannot ever let up. I read where the NY SAFE Act was going to be challenged. Nathan Haddad is one reason, this commenter is another.