Shock Video: Police Prepare For War With Gun Owners, Preppers And Constitutionalists

[donnay]

[Deborah K]

So "Constitutionalists" are now a threat to the police state. Noted. (would love to know where that was recorded.)

[CaptainAmerica]

What is the context of the interview statements that the man in an unknown uniform stated? For all I know he may be talking about something completely different, I do not like AJ and I hate this editing,its provocative

[donnay]

Here is the article I found on it, my apologies for just posting the video, but that was all I found on Drudge earlier.


Police: Armored Military Vehicles Needed for ‘Constitutionalists’ with Firearms
"We've got a lot of constitutionalists... a lot of people that stockpile weapons"

by Mikael Thalen | Infowars.com | December 13, 2014

Shocking video provided exclusively to Infowars shows a Washington state sheriff’s deputy proclaiming that law enforcement officers need armored military vehicles because of “constitutionalists” with firearms.

The footage, recently captured in Spokane Valley, begins with a local resident asking two deputies why police would need vehicles specifically designed for warfare abroad.

“I mean, we’ve got a lot of constitutionalists and a lot of people that stockpile weapons, lots of ammunition,” one deputy says. “They have weapons here locally.”

The startling admission not only points to active surveillance of legal gun owners, but of those who support the country’s founding document, further solidifying concerns among law-abiding citizens that police are receiving military equipment and training in order to target conservative Americans.

The deputy’s specific mention of “constitutionalists,” a broad term covering of millions of Americans, as opposed to criminals in general, also indicates a clear training mindset linked to the FBI and Homeland Security, two groups which have absurdly labeled “liberty-lovers” as terror threats.

Such clear talking points are unsurprising given reports that Spokane County sheriffs have received training from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that ludicrously compares mainline conservative Americans to racist hate groups.

Infowars was unable to reach the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office for comment at the time of publishing, but did speak with Spokane Valley Republican Representative Matthew Shea, who was appalled when presented with the footage.

“Will law abiding citizens who love the Constitution and Rule of Law be hunted down with MRAPs?” Shea asked. “Constitutionalism is fundamental to being an American. To hate the Constitution and those who support it means you are a traitor to this country.”

“This is spitting in the face of all those heroes that fought, bled, and died so we might live free. The question should be, why aren’t you a Constitutionalist? Why don’t you believe in the rule of law? Why don’t you believe that the Constitution means what it says?”

Incredibly, the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office is not the first to cite patriotic Americans as reasoning for military hardware.

A police sergeant in Morgan County, Indiana admitted just last May that his department had obtained an armored vehicle in part because of returning military veterans, deemed domestic terror threats by Homeland Security in 2009.

In August of 2013, Concord, New Hampshire Police Chief John Duval secretly contacted Homeland Security and demanded an armored vehicle due to the alleged “threat” posed by peaceful libertarians.

A New York State Counter Terrorism Bulletin leaked to Infowars by concerned police that same year attempted to label anyone concerned with government gun confiscation as “far right” conspiracy theorists, even as admitted gun confiscation programs are used against law abiding citizens in states such as California.

The MIAC Report, a federal training document famously presented to Missouri police in 2009, went as far as falsely tying supporters of former Presidential Candidate Ron Paul and the Constitution to “extremist groups” as well.

Despite a massive drop in police officer deaths, gun homicide and violent crime in the last 2o years, government agencies across the board continue to adopt military tactics in order to fight anything that represents traditional America.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/mt.examiner
Follow Mikael Thalen @ https://twitter.com/MikaelThalen

[Anti Federalist]

Just another day in the War on Us.

[Henry Rogue]

So "Constitutionalists" are now a threat to the police state. Noted. (would love to know where that was recorded.)

Well, if a police state is unconstitutional, then i guess a Constitutionalists would be perceived as a threat to a police statist.

[youngbuck]

What is the context of the interview statements that the man in an unknown uniform stated? For all I know he may be talking about something completely different, I do not like AJ and I hate this editing,its provocative

It sounds like you didn't watch the video... It's pretty clear what the MRAP guy is saying.

[Deborah K]

Well, if a police state is unconstitutional, then i guess a Constitutionalists would be perceived as a threat to a police statist.

That may not be the first time you have heard the police infer that Constitutionalists are threat, but it's the first time that I have.

[donnay]

That may not be the first time you have heard the police infer that Constitutionalists are threat, but it's the first time that I have.

"Public Servants" Going After "Constitutional Terrorists"?
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsa...articleid=2126

[Christian Liberty]

I'm curious what the police captain I know would think about this...

I think you guys know my opinion already. They're scumbags. As I've seen Adam Kokesh point out in the past, "constitutionalists" are actually the moderates. What on earth are they going to do with someone like me?

[phill4paul]

He didn't imply anything bad. He said...

“I mean, we’ve got a lot of constitutionalists and a lot of people that stockpile weapons, lots of ammunition,” one deputy says. “They have weapons here locally.”

So...

1) There's a lot of constitutionalists.

and, also

2) There's a lot of people that stock pile

a) weapons
b) lot of ammunition.

And most important, there are weapons locally.

So, in summary, he wasn't implying constitutionalists are gun nuts. /copsucker

[PaulConventionWV]

What is the context of the interview statements that the man in an unknown uniform stated? For all I know he may be talking about something completely different, I do not like AJ and I hate this editing,its provocative

It's pretty clear from the reporter's question what they were talking about.

[PaulConventionWV]

That may not be the first time you have heard the police infer that Constitutionalists are threat, but it's the first time that I have.

I've heard it said in so many words, but this is rather direct. It's probably one of the most direct proclamations that "constitutionalists" are the enemy that I've ever heard. They've been thinking it for a long time, but this is the first time I've heard it stated so bluntly.

[PaulConventionWV]

He didn't imply anything bad. He said...



So...

1) There's a lot of constitutionalists.

and, also

2) There's a lot of people that stock pile

a) weapons
b) lot of ammunition.

And most important, there are weapons locally.

So, in summary, he wasn't implying constitutionalists are gun nuts. /copsucker

You had me worried for your sanity there for a second.

[brushfire]

So "Constitutionalists" are now a threat to the police state. Noted. (would love to know where that was recorded.)

This has been the case for a long time. We were all essentially labeled "domestic terrorists" by Janet.

Pro-constitution : Terrorist
Anti-Abortion: Terrorist
Pro-Gun: Terrorist
Anti-Illegal Alien - Terrorist
Ex-Military: Terrorist
Pro-Christian: Terrorist
Anti-Obama: Terrorist


http://www.trugop.org/PDF_Documents/...mistReport.pdf


And that's all that I got to say to the likes of you, terrorist...

[Henry Rogue]

That may not be the first time you have heard the police infer that Constitutionalists are threat, but it's the first time that I have.

Sorry Deborah if I was flippant or snarky. Although i responded directly to your post, i had a broader audience in mind, when typing my post. A long with evidence of guilt, prosecutors try to show motive. That was what i attempted to do, show motivation of the police state in casting Constitutionalists as a domestic terrorist threat.

Here is a link to an old thread that i had recently read. > http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...errorists-quot But there was a more recent thread this past summer on the subject, that i recall. Unfortunately i had no luck finding it.

[Acala]

I find this amusing. The police are very brave and aggressive when the odds are ten to one and the victim is alone and unarmed. As soon as someone with an adequate weapon and some skill starts shooting back, they flee. And if a few riflemen start shooting back, the police will be utterly neutralized as a force regardless of their tacticool military surplus equipment. They are a danger to individuals now, but will not have a role in any serious upheaval. Putting officer safety first makes them dangerous "public servants" but it also makes them useless soldiers. And they are not going to engage in any massive gun confiscation. They are not capable of doing it. Not even close.

[Henry Rogue]

I find this amusing. The police are very brave and aggressive when the odds are ten to one and the victim is alone and unarmed. As soon as someone with an adequate weapon and some skill starts shooting back, they flee. And if a few riflemen start shooting back, the police will be utterly neutralized as a force regardless of their tacticool military surplus equipment. They are a danger to individuals now, but will not have a role in any serious upheaval. Putting officer safety first makes them dangerous "public servants" but it also makes them useless soldiers. And they are not going to engage in any massive gun confiscation. They are not capable of doing it. Not even close.

True, unless the resolve and organization of the riflemen are lacking.

[pcosmar]

They are not capable of doing it. Not even close.

No,,
but they are working on it.

[Deborah K]

Sorry Deborah if I was flippant or snarky. Although i responded directly to your post, i had a broader audience in mind, when typing my post. A long with evidence of guilt, prosecutors try to show motive. That was what i attempted to do, show motivation of the police state in casting Constitutionalists as a domestic terrorist threat.

Here is a link to an old thread that i had recently read. > http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...errorists-quot But there was a more recent thread this past summer on the subject, that i recall. Unfortunately i had no luck finding it.

No worries. Thanks for the link. I'm out of touch. I didn't realize it was getting this bad. This clip really upset me.

[Uriel999]

I really would like to know how high on the list I've made it.

[Deborah K]

This has been the case for a long time. We were all essentially labeled "domestic terrorists" by Janet.

Pro-constitution : Terrorist
Anti-Abortion: Terrorist
Pro-Gun: Terrorist
Anti-Illegal Alien - Terrorist
Ex-Military: Terrorist
Pro-Christian: Terrorist
Anti-Obama: Terrorist


http://www.trugop.org/PDF_Documents/...mistReport.pdf


And that's all that I got to say to the likes of you, terrorist...

Uh yeah...Mark and I fit 6 out of 7 on that list...I downloaded that to my hard drive. Thanks...I guess.

[pcosmar]

No worries. Thanks for the link. I'm out of touch. I didn't realize it was getting this bad. This clip really upset me.

I thought the MIAC Report would have made it clear to everyone.

/sigh

[Deborah K]

I thought the MIAC Report would have made it clear to everyone.

/sigh

It was bad, yes. But Constitutionalists????? Anyone who supports the Constitution itself is now considered a homegrown terrorist?

[brushfire]

Uh yeah...Mark and I fit 6 out of 7 on that list...I downloaded that to my hard drive. Thanks...I guess.

No problem - At least we domestic terrorists keep good company

[Indy Vidual]

It was bad, yes. But Constitutionalists????? Anyone who supports the Constitution itself is now considered a homegrown terrorist?

There was police training material (from Homeland security?) in Texas a few years ago that specifically mentioned people who 'support the Constitution' being a likely threat, or at least a clear warning sign.

[pcosmar]

It was bad, yes. But Constitutionalists????? Anyone who supports the Constitution itself is now considered a homegrown terrorist?

Yup,, Constitutionalists
And Ron Paul supporters.

Most recently the Patriots that stood with the Bundy's.

I have embraced the Domestic Terrorist Label. since way back then.

[CaptainAmerica]

It sounds like you didn't watch the video... It's pretty clear what the MRAP guy is saying.

yes it is clear, but what is the context of what he is saying, maybe you didn't get the memo.

[kcchiefs6465]

yes it is clear, but what is the context of what he is saying, maybe you didn't get the memo.

The entire context would be nice (was he speaking of a civil insurrection or simply of those respectful of 2nd Amendment rights) but it isn't really needed.

What he means is: If you are one of the people that do not particularly care about being taken from, or your rights being trampled, and you actively resist such effects outside of the judicial system, you will be faced with as many armed troopers as necessary to either arrest or murder you. The MRAP is just a tool to that effect.

And this is no conspiracy, it should be evident and non-controversial. I don't need some stuttering bumpkin to explain to me why they have these vehicles of war.

[Matt Collins]

Can we please quit spreading Infowars stuff? They have no credibility and hurt more than they help because they have a very bad reputation.