PDA

View Full Version : Going Limp




Anti Federalist
03-09-2014, 12:55 AM
Going Limp

by eric • March 7, 2014

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/03/07/going-limp/

I’ve read that it’s an effective defense tactic to go limp – become deadweight – in the event someone’s trying to force you to go with them. It’s advice directed mainly at women facing the prospect of a kidnapping/sexual assault – the object being to make it harder for the thug to have his way by refusing to assist in your own abduction.

There’s a valuable lesson here: Don’t cooperate.

Even better, don’t participate.

Two things come to mind, one facing some people – the other facing pretty much all people. The first is Connecticut’s (and Colorado’s) attempts to criminalize mere possession by the non-anointed (that’s you and me) of many types of firearms and accessories – such as “high capacity” magazines – on the premise that having a certain type of firearm (or “high capacity” magazine) is the same thing as using it to harm others. Kind of like having a penis means a man is – ipso facto – a rapist. Or that having a vagina must mean the individual is a prostitute.

The second thing is, of course, Obamacare – the federal government forcing everyone not already on the dole to hand over their money to an insurance mafiosi. This is a new low – even for Washington. But in a way at least, it’s more direct – more honest. Government has always been about profiting at the expense of others, using violence to achieve those ends. Obamacare makes this explicit. You – and I – are to be held up at gunpoint and made to hand over money for the profit of a private enterprise. To line the pockets – and bloat the salaries – of insurance executives under the pretense of providing “health care.” The fact is, all you’ll be getting in return is an insurance policy – quite a different thing.

If, that is, we play along.

For the first time in a very long time (perhaps not since the 1850s) there is widespread rejection in principle of the government’s actions. People – hundreds of thousands of them in CT and probably at least that many in CO – have already “gone limp” by refusing to play along. They have not turned in their banned firearms and illegal “high capacity” magazines. They have thereby placed the government in a very awkward – perhaps politically untenable position. It will either have to tacitly accept what amounts to a vox populi nullification of the edict.

Or it will attempt to enforce it.

In the case of the latter, it is probable there would be widespread revulsion at the spectacle of SWAT raids on the homes of literally thousands of “law abiding” people. And – much more critically – these “law abiding” Mr. and Mrs. Middle America would finally be disabused of the pleasant fiction that Gestapo tactics are only used against “bad” people (i.e., not their type of people), that only those who “deserve it” ( you know, blacks – and of course, “terrorists”) ever feel the cold fist of the state’s power. At this point, the government has lost the one thing it must have to maintain its power – the appearance, at least, of consent.

It can still maintain its power by the naked exercise of force – but once that it is out in the open, the naked exercise of force is all it has left. No more flag-waving, pin-wearing land-of-the-free 4th of July we’re the exceptional nation flapdoodle. The people will know. And once they do, the jig is up.

Or will be, in short order.

In the case of the former – tacit acceptance of the people’s nullification by widespread civil disobedience – the government also loses. The fiction of its unassailable authority is collapsed. If it can be disobeyed once without consequences, then why not disobey it again? Why obey it at all?

It becomes a toothless tiger.

Obamacare presents us with an even greater opportunity – because of the far more widespread rejection of being forced to hand over money to private, for-profit cartels. In every state, in every poll, there is majority antipathy toward Obamacare. Millions have already expressed their intention to not play along – to go limp – by not signing up.

The federal government faces the same lose-lose choice faced by the state governments of CT and CO. It can either accept what amounts to an informal public referendum on Obamacare and the implicit rejection of the government’s right to impose such a thing on people – and all that will inevitably follow from that. Or it can attempt to enforce its law. Which will entail (at first) confiscating people’s money and (if that’s insufficient) their property – and ultimately, threatening them with prison for failing to comply. In which case, once again, the public will be quickly disabused of any lingering notion about “consent of the governed” and “democracy.” They will know they live in a thugocracy – and henceforth will only obey if forced. Openly forced. No more pretense, no more Happy Talk – no more illusions.

We win – again.

Because in the long run, societies openly held together at bayonet-point do not endure. Slaves – prisoners – are not productive. They do what they must, no more. Even the old Soviet Union was dynamic only so long as the people actually did believe the government was benevolent. That “good people” had no reason to worry.

Stalin showed them otherwise – and it held together, for awhile. Because Stalin was a rarity (thank god) even among sociopaths.

Most of them (sociopaths) are more like Obama – or his predecessors.They can be beaten because they themselves shy away from going all out – from mass murder. They countenance “wet work,” certainly – but prefer not to do it themselves, and perhaps like to pretend to themselves that it’s not done at all. They rarely have the stomach to see it done on a mass scale.

Prosecuting a lone tax protestor is easy enough. He has few friends – and little sympathy.Thousands of demonstrators protest again

But when the government goes after large groups of people heretofore “law abiding” – and regarding themselves and others as “good people” – then the game is afoot.

We can do our part by forcing the government to choose from either of two equally dangerous (to its legitimacy and thus, its power) alternatives.

All we have to do is go limp – and not play along.

Throw it in the Woods?

youngbuck
03-09-2014, 01:15 AM
I'll allow government to have its way with me in exchange for protection from terrorists and building the roads.

Petar
03-09-2014, 01:36 AM
Going Limp

Story of my life...

MichaelDavis
03-09-2014, 01:38 AM
I'll allow government to have its way with me in exchange for protection from terrorists and building the roads.

http://thoughtsonliberty.com/files/2012/12/but-who-will-build-the-roads-600x338.jpg

mad cow
03-09-2014, 01:49 AM
Didn't the deadline for Obamacare happen on March first?I really don't know and I really don't care but if they are going to seize $95 from my taxes April,2015 so be it,I won't revolt.

But if they ever come to my house to seize my guns,people are going to die.I will most likely be one of them,but it is still going to be people.Plural.And I live by myself.

CPUd
03-09-2014, 02:09 AM
http://i.imgur.com/FQTJsj1.gif

http://i.imgur.com/JrHKqne.gif

phill4paul
03-09-2014, 08:46 AM
I. Will. Not. Comply.

Bonus, they cannot steal $95 from me every year because I. Do. Not. Comply. when it comes to Federal taxes.

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 09:11 AM
This goes here.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NcLNoxiPBk

MelissaWV
03-09-2014, 12:51 PM
Actually, all of it depends upon the situation. Plus if you're a lightweight, going limp really just helps you become a light, non-fighting target they can toss in the trunk more easily. There are other situations where making yourself heavier will just result in getting dragged, usually by the legs, with head and arms and hands all becoming casualties along the way, making it harder to escape later. In other words, unless you are absolutely certain your captors are going to be lazy and give up and wander off, going limp isn't really the best answer.

The advice most often given is simply to make noise, to make your situation noticed, to make your captors or would-be robbers or whatever so uncomfortable that they see you as not being worth the risk anymore. Not knowing if they've actually been seen, they are also less likely to escalate whatever crime they're caught in the act of.

Lastly, there are some situations where it's best to go along (if you're the only one at risk) until there's a good opportunity to escape AND make life hell for the people responsible. Lulling them into trusting you, even though they will always have the advantage, can help you overcome that advantage.

It's situational.

Just ask the dozens of possums along the side of the highway every morning.

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 01:10 PM
It's situational.


I have always preferred the element of surprise.

MelissaWV
03-09-2014, 02:53 PM
I have always preferred the element of surprise.

Of course, but the idea of being in a situation where going limp is an option means they've gotten the jump on you. So either you assess your situation and figure out that fighting now is an awesome idea, you go limp and hope they think you're more trouble than they're worth (or you go limp and surprise them by being heavier than you look, hence giving you an advantage), or you go along until you otherwise regain the element of surprise.

pcosmar
03-09-2014, 03:01 PM
Of course, but the idea of being in a situation where going limp is an option means they've gotten the jump on you. So either you assess your situation and figure out that fighting now is an awesome idea, you go limp and hope they think you're more trouble than they're worth (or you go limp and surprise them by being heavier than you look, hence giving you an advantage), or you go along until you otherwise regain the element of surprise.

The wonderful thing about surprise is that it comes as a surprise. ;)

When limp suddenly turns into berserk.

I tend to remain fluid in my tactics,, but if it seems I will die (or am otherwise thoroughly screwed) anyway,, why not chance it?

DamianTV
03-09-2014, 04:34 PM
This is one of the few cases where doing nothing can result in something positive, with the right set of circumstances.

A few thoughts come to mind. First, Obamacare isnt really Socialized Medicine, it is Corpratized Health Insurance. Next is that the dead weight spoken of needs to be sufficient enough to cause a burden to those that carry you. They are already shooting themselve in thier ow feet, repeatedly, as if aiming for themselves, by not creating any good paying jobs that would allow people to spend more money on goods and services that are taxed simply because they have more money to spend. Thus, collecting welfare, food stamps, or any form of Govt handout also places dead weight for them to carry.

Ghande didnt advocate violence. He condoned it when it was absolutely necessary. He also said poverty is the most destructive form of violence, and exactly the type of violence the Govt monopolizes on. Are you poor? Theres a fine for that.