Jump to content

[Historical] Seventy-Two Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation In Maryland


Ryusei the Morning Star

Recommended Posts

Note: This thread refers to a historical event

 

National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.

 

Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement.

 

Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals,” issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s efforts to secure law and order.

 

The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons.

 

Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms.

 

One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.”

 

Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government’s plans.

 

During a tense standoff in the Lexington town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists.

 

Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.

 

Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat.

 

Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops.

 

Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders” of the extremist faction, remain at large.

 

And this fellow Americans, is how the American Revolution began, April 20, 1775.

 

History. Study it, or repeat it.

 


 

Some gentle History 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it happened centuries ago, it's not "BREAKING NEWS" as the article claims. At the start of the article it claims this happened on the 1st of March, but at the end it says 20th of April, so which is it? Also I'm no gun expert by any means, but I didn't think they had assault weapons in 1775.
 
You might want to make it clearer that you're talking about something that happened in 1775, as the date is quite buried among a text wall so it really looks like you're trying to spread misinformation here. Again, you've described this as "News" in the topic title which is extremely deceitful since news describes recent events.
 
So many problems with this article and this topic At best, it's clickbait and at worst it's a malicious attempt to trick people into thinking that this is something that actually happened in March 2018, while putting in the "that was in 1775" bait-and-switch so that you've got an out if someone calls you on your shit. I'm leaning more towards the latter (at least with the article, I'd like to think that Winter just thought it was a funny meme), and the "March 1 vs April 20" discrepancy supports this conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, it was a month long slow skirmish at the founding of my nation Speedy. About how a government attempted to rob it's citizens of rights.

 

And for your information, muskets WERE military grade weapons of the time so "assault weapons" is an accurate description. As a brit, you should know the name Lexington :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, it was a month long slow skirmish at the founding of my nation Speedy. About how a government attempted to rob it's citizens of rights.

 

And for your information, muskets WERE military grade weapons of the time so "assault weapons" is an accurate description. As a brit, you should know the name Lexington :P

 

The Second Amendment was not formally adopted until 1791, sixteen years after what the article details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Second Amendment was not formally adopted until 1791, sixteen years after what the article details.

Yes. The right at the time that was being infringed upon was taxation without representation and a loss of habeus corpus? Seeing the president cheer on "Take the guns first, due process second" with Diane Feinstein and others is kinda relevant to the latter. I was mostly posting this in light of the argument that the 2A doesn't protect "weapons of war" 

 

Time is relative, and Muskets were weapons of war. They were still protected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Title was edited by Cow to reflect accuracy. I've got good mind to merge this with the gun control debate that's already active, but I'm going to show a bit of patience.

 

Winter, I'd like for you to explain to me why this thread warrants its own discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...