Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston!

Boston – 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.

signing_of_the_declaration_of_independenceOn July 4th, 1776 these same extremists signed the Declaration of Independence, pledging to each other and their countrymen their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. Many of them lost everything, including their families and their lives over the course of the next few years.

Lest we forget…




Let us not forget!



278 Responses to Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston!

  1. Pingback: Who Is The Militia? | Waiting for the Barbarians

  2. Paul West Reply

    August 13, 2016 at 6:01 pm

    And this, people, is how the American Revolution began.

    April 20, 1775

    To those who are worried/offended/hurt/inconvenienced about the “Breaking” aspect of the title:

    Let’s not forget

  3. matt Reply

    August 12, 2016 at 6:40 am

    The fact that people suck up this bullshit as “History” astounds me. So what really happened on April 19, 1775? Apparently few were paying attention in 8th grade history class. xD

    • Me Reply

      September 29, 2016 at 1:11 pm

      Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia owned and operated by members of the Khazarian tribe, you know your Jew masters. Wikipedia is banned in school curriculums as sources of information for essays, term papers, etc, due to the fact the information contained in Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with their own views on revisionist history.

  4. Pingback: Confusing Light for Darkness | Head Space

  5. dchamp Reply

    July 22, 2016 at 12:09 pm

    I enjoyed how you brought the past to the present and presented it as would our current socialist inspired puppy dog news outlets.

  6. Jim Furr Reply

    July 22, 2016 at 10:08 am

    The government will Never overcome the resistance!
    They will find out just what a can of worms they open when trying to grab guns from Americans who have a constitutionally right to own any guns they want!

    • Judith evans Reply

      July 22, 2016 at 3:44 pm

      I don’t own a gun, but I was under the impression that we were allowed to bare arms in America. Was I misled????

      • Michael H Schmidt Reply

        October 17, 2016 at 7:12 am

        Yeah. /last year alone under the skimpy guise of having Psychiatrists turn in information on some patients because they were suffering from depression some local governments have gone to peoples houses and confiscated their weapons against the patients wishes. Many of those who have had their weapons confiscated are Military veterans. They’re even considering gun confiscation from people on disabilities.

  7. Pingback: Shocking News: Anti-Gunners Begin Confiscation; Dozens Killed for Resisting – The Daily Conservative

  8. Pingback: Soros strikes Brexit gold… The repurposing of ISIS… Hillary skirts Justice for Independence Day… so much more… | Auribus Arrectis

  9. Fred Smoot Reply

    July 1, 2016 at 6:07 pm

    Do any of you people ever read what you write before you post it ?
    Or, are you really that incompetent at being able to express yourself in writing ?

  10. Pingback: It Couldn't Happen Here, Right? - John Gardner

  11. Pingback: History as Deadly Force | Head Space


    June 21, 2016 at 11:46 pm

    Spot on!

  13. Andrew Emmings Reply

    June 21, 2016 at 11:08 pm

    Hell Yeah.

  14. Robert Reply

    June 21, 2016 at 5:10 pm

    This happened 242 years ago. Governor Gage was a military governor at the time.

  15. Pingback: 72 Killed In Boston Weapons Confiscation Raid | NEWS WITHOUT THE NUDES!

  16. Pingback: 72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation In Boston | Political American

  17. Pingback: 72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation In Boston

  18. Chuck (Smithfix) Smith Reply

    June 20, 2016 at 11:10 am


    How do you make sure your Military stays loyal to the Government, not the people? Insert ‘Political Commissars’ in the command ranks.
    Regardless of what they claim, that is what this is.-Smithfix

  19. Pingback: Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston! | Fauquier Free Citizen | The Invisible Opportunity: Hidden Truths Revealed

  20. msl Reply

    June 19, 2016 at 10:46 pm

    The US is dying from a million cuts. Part of the reason the USA is a nanny police state now is that whenever there is a problem, the kneejerk reaction in the US is to call for a new law.

    Nanny state laws are not the best solution, however. Nanny state laws lead to more laws, higher fines, and tougher sentences. Thirty years ago, DWI laws were enacted that led to DWI checkpoints and lower DWI levels. Seatbelt laws led to backseat seatbelt laws, childseat laws, and pet seatbelt laws. Car liability insurance laws led to health insurance laws and gun liability laws. Smoking laws that banned smoking in buildings led to laws against smoking in parks and then bans against smoking in entire cities. Sex offender registration laws led to sex offender restriction laws and violent offender registration laws.

    Nanny state laws don’t make us safer, either. Nanny state laws lead people to be careless since they don’t need to have personal responsibility anymore. People don’t need to be careful crossing the street now because drunk-driving has been outlawed and driving while using a cellphone is illegal. People don’t investigate companies or carry out due diligence because businesses must have business licenses now.

    The main point of nanny state laws is not safety. The main purposes of more laws are control and revenue generation for the state.

    Another reason laws are enacted is because corporations give donations to lawmakers to stifle competition or increase sales.

    Many laws are contradictory, too. Some laws say watering lawns is required, while other laws say watering lawns is illegal.

    Many nanny state laws that aim to solve a problem can be fixed by using existing laws. If assault is already illegal, why do we need a new law that outlaws hitting umpires?

    Nanny state laws are not even necessary. If everything was legal would you steal, murder, and use crack cocaine?

    Aren’t there other ways to solve problems besides calling the police? Couldn’t people educate or talk to people who bother them? Couldn’t people just move away? Even if assault was legal, wouldn’t attackers risk being killed or injured, too?

    Jail or not, you need to live with your conscience.

    If there is no victim, there is no crime.

    We don’t need thousands of laws when we only need 10.

    Freedom is not just a one way street. You can only have freedom for yourself if you allow others to have it.

    Should swimming pools be banned because they are dangerous?
    Hammers? Bottles? Rocks? Energy drinks? Lighters? Pillows?

    People think crime magically goes away when something is outlawed, but there are still murders even though it’s illegal.

    Control freaks might get angry when a neighbor owns three indoor cats, but what did the neighbor take from them? Why should this be illegal?

    Is outlawing cats something a free country should do?

    Doesn’t banning everything sound like the opposite of freedom?

    Instead of getting mad at people who like liberty, why don’t people realize that freedom goes both ways?

    If you allow others to paint their house purple then you can, too.

    If you allow others to own a gun then you can, too.

    If you allow others to swear then you can, too.

    If you allow others to gamble then you can, too.

    Who wants to live in a prison?

    Think. Question everything.

  21. Dave Reply

    June 19, 2016 at 2:52 pm

    I cannot wait!
    The sooner this inevitable attempt at mil pattern gun grabs unfolds, the sooner we can get the show on the road towards a more representative, less offensive form of government.

    • Will Reply

      June 19, 2016 at 7:12 pm

      It wont be a millitary style confiscation. They know this would spark revolt. They tested a “better” way on small scales. They will the state and local goverments to do it. Any that don’t comply will have federal funding taken a way cuasing most to fall in line. Due to man power and funding shortages it wont be sudden or all at once. Gorst target highest crime cities as there will be fewer complaints as they all ready have done door to door gun siezures there in the past. They move out systamaticly from there. Any resitance will be spun as proof that it needs to happen. If you hid your guns it will be criminal and you will be delt with the second you are cought. These will happen on small one on one criminal cases with little to no news coverage so most wont care or even know. Scary that they have all ready planed the least messiest way to go about it.

  22. franklin Reply

    June 19, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    There has never been a government that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.

    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!

    • Will Reply

      June 19, 2016 at 6:46 pm

      Part of the problem people have with understanding the 2nd amendment is that they read as if it was written in todays language. For example militia was often used to refer to the people of a state, or said more clearly in todays language, the citizens of a state. Well regulated was a reference to said citizrns being well armed. Today we use regulated to mean orginized, disaplined and approved by yhe goverment. One has to understand the language and how it was used at the time in order to understand what was meant. In todays language it would read, “The well armed citizen being necisary to a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” once you understand the language it’s very clear.

      Ware one of our biggest problems comes from started around the late 1800’s with the progressive movement. They feel the constitution is wrong and should only contain positive rights of the citizen. Meaning the things the goverment has to provide to the citizens. They also feel that the constitution should be fluid and easily change to fit the current situation. They attempted to achive this, and have in some cased, by loading the courts with progressive judges willing to rule contrary to the consititution. This is how we ended up with peace time income tax. Prior federal income tax was only constitutional during times of war. They ran the same law with different titles, and esentialy the same wording through the courts multiple times untill it was upheld. It doesn’t change the fact that it was found unconsitutional two times prior, witch still makes it so. Due to the fact they were able to get one additional progressive on the supream court they were able to get it heard one more time and approved. A means to recall activist supream court judges needs to figured out and added as an amendment to the constitution. It shouldn’t be an easy process, but should be able to be dobe to help put a check on the activist judges. I’m sure we will see some really screwed up rullings from judges such as Stomyor.

  23. Pingback: 72 killed in Boston - Gun Confiscation - Homesteading Today

  24. NobodysaysBOO Reply

    June 19, 2016 at 12:48 pm

    A coffee or pot tax might get this thing rolling again great post .

    The INSURGENT ALIENS from the OBUMMERS /bush / clinton TRIBE has pushed this GARBAGE on the CITIZENS of the USA so that NOBODY could ever know about the US REVOLUTION or constitutional RIGHTS these new scumbag economic refuse will do ANYTHING the OBUMMERS SAY. INCLUDING MASS MURDER .

    NEVER NEVER believe or listen to ANYBODY from Israel or little BROWN people in white lab coats.

    • Nina Reply

      July 1, 2016 at 12:40 pm

      There is a “Pot” tax. It is legal in WA. State. The way they set it up here is it is regulated by the liquor board and most stores for pot are next to the liquor store. So to taxes, if you by a $40.00 bag from a dealer you get 4 grams but here if you get a $40.00 from a store you only get 3.5 grams. Before everyone starts calling me a pot head , I am a terminal cancer patient and it does help me eat and keeps terrible thoughts of the word Terminal at bay.

      • Will Reply

        July 1, 2016 at 12:55 pm

        I was going to say, every place they made it recreational use legal the first thing did was slap a big tax on it. Most complained, but as is normal with recreational user enough pot and time goes by and the complaints disapered. Just wait 5 or 10 years from when they continue to up the sin tax on it even more due to the impact on soceity. I’m not for banning it, but they left out a ctitical step in the process of addressing the soceital issues that drive so many to be wasted the majority of thier life. Once you can get a grasp on these issues you will have those who will do it, but it wont be an all consuming desire to be intoxicated every day. Medical use is one thing,recreational is another. Even when illegal the soceital issues leading to the intense desire from a large portion of population will still be there. So criminalization or legalization is not the answer.

  25. James Harwell Reply

    May 23, 2016 at 3:07 pm

    pingback you’re an idiot. The Constitution gives us as law abiding Americans the Legal Right to Own Any Kind of Firearm. When Firearms are Taken out of The Hands of Law Abiding Americans We Will No Longer Be A Free Country Because the Government Will Be More Powerful Than The People.

  26. Andrew Miller Reply

    May 23, 2016 at 4:54 am

    This is very heartbreaking to know that all of these could have been prevented if people would just let guns be stored properly and investigated.

  27. Caleb McKean Reply

    January 25, 2016 at 2:38 pm

    Did this solve the problem?

    • Chet Misialek Reply

      February 15, 2016 at 4:11 am

      Of course not. Human nature has no fix… but they left us the blueprint for a machine that keeps it in check. The machine just needs a tune up, real bad… and a thorough cleaning.

      Its our right and responsibility as citizens to keep it running smooth, and shiny. So do something about whats happening!

  28. Forkeepingarmsantirevolution Reply

    January 22, 2016 at 1:09 pm

    The biggest fear i personaly have with a modern day revolution is that will end up just like syria and the Ukraine bust up to shit and on top of thing we’ll have a huge disagreement if won by the citizens, on what to do with the country and start fighting each other?

    • Will Reply

      April 11, 2016 at 10:30 pm

      That was the exact same fear that kept 70% from supporting the first revolution. Most don’t only 30% of the population supported the revolution. It will all ways be the responsibility of those who over throw the tyrants to make sure that a new tyrant is not installed, or worse that a power vaccum emerges and anarchy follows. Fortunetly the big difference between us and the middle east is that they do want freedom. They want a tyrant to impose their beliefs on others. They complain when it’s them that is forced to accept the beliefs of others. They are used to and have come to cultraly accept being ruled by force.

      Also a bennifit that we have is that most of the work has all ready been done for us during and after the first revoltion. We don’t have to shed the decleration and consition in order to over throw the current tyrants. We only need to add to it to help prevent them taking controll again. Remember we were sucessful only becuase the framers began planing before they even won. This helps prevent the worst case anarchy. Even Obama has finaly admited to one of his biggest mistakes was not having “day after plan” in Lybia. He stated he expected Europe to take charge. In typical progressive style he shifted blame to them. He was the instigator. Obama had to convince Europe to get involved. Then he expected to be able to sit back and let Europe handle the messy part. This is same thing he accused Bush of in regards to Iraq. At least Bush admin had a plan. It just wasn’t the best plan.

      • H5mind Reply

        June 19, 2016 at 6:19 pm

        Will, the “30% in favor, rest against or indifferent” refers to Colonist attitudes about the French Revolution, not the American Revolution. Then, as now, the majority of the people had no faith in their government because the system had become hopelessly corrupted, tyrannical, and beneficial only to the wealthy and well-connected. They were being taxed and exploited by foreign masters who saw them as chattel and cannon fodder. The few rights they had were routinely ignored or “reinterpreted” in the Crown’s favor.

        • Will Reply

          June 19, 2016 at 7:01 pm

          Actualy for the American revolution it was close to 30% as well. Closer to 32%, but darn near the same. A larg segment of the population complained and was pissed, but unwilling to go the extra step due to how the king was able to put down other revolutions with great force and carnage. Some were so focused on just getting by in life they had little means, or much of an informed opion. Once the revolution started a portion of them jumped in rasing the percentage, but the percent willing to start the revolution was closer to 30% The same is prety much true today. A large segment doesn’t like what is going on, but unwilling to do any thing. This includes informing and educating them selves enough to make thier vite count, or get in the political ring them selves. Others are barely getting by and are focused on housing, food, and utilities. 25 – 30% are willing to work with in the system, but haven’t been pushed far enough to pick up arms yet.

  29. Ben Hogan Reply

    January 19, 2016 at 7:09 pm

    Most ironic of all is that taxation for the benefit of a non-taxed class and weapons control and confiscation are again the hot points in a dispute between the government and the people

  30. Robert Reply

    December 19, 2015 at 6:18 pm

    Can this incident be verified by an other news source?

    • Matt Reply

      January 1, 2016 at 10:55 am

      It’s called a history lesson. It happened BEFORE the American Revolution

  31. Lazarus Reply

    December 7, 2015 at 11:54 pm

    In every dictatorship in history, the government takes away the guns of the citizens then massacres them. If we the people don’t fight, then we will die for nothing and the corporations, and the families that own everything will get there plan executed to reduce the population. It’s up to us citizens to fight for out right to live.

    • John Southwell Reply

      December 19, 2015 at 4:42 pm

      I love how when the Government decides to do something heinous against the American people and the people fight back they are more so labeled terrorists or like wording. I believe that it is time to show this rogue Government that we the people have had enough of their elites self centered, self serving actions and shall and will take our Country back to which it was founded for people of the States of America. The America was formed just because Britain was doing the same thing our Government is doing! If you don’t fight for our rights and freedoms for yourself then fight for our children, Grandchildren’s right in the not so distant future or there won’t be a future for anyone!

  32. commando Reply

    November 1, 2015 at 9:14 pm

    (We the people), is what the constitution states! And it is the header of an official government document sighned sealed notarized and witnessed!So that makes it official back in 1775 and 1776 they used what we call a number line it goes from 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 to infinity!catch my point (we the people)are above the government in every way form and fashion!It Can-not be taken away from added to nor abridged in any way form or fashion!

  33. David Hobson Reply

    July 28, 2015 at 2:17 am

    Why would a militia possess three 24 pound siege guns in Concord in 1775? If that question is answered then it might explain a lot of why the British sent 700 men on a very dangerous march out of Boston.It might explain what the Lexington militia chose to stand against the British. What if they were ordered to protect those three siege guns?

  34. David Hobson Reply

    July 28, 2015 at 2:16 am

    Why would a militia possess three 24 pound siege guns in Concord in 1775? If that question is answered then it might explain a lot of why the British sent 700 men on a very dangerous march out of Boston.I might explain what the Lexington militia chose to stand against the British. What if they were ordered to protect those three siege guns?

    • Will Reply

      June 20, 2016 at 12:03 pm

      The answer to why they had 24 pound cannons prior the revolution going hot is in our American history. They were not seige cannons, as siege cannons are much larger and design to destroy fortifications and not infantry. 24lbs cannons are designed to take out infantry. The readon forhaving them was that shoots had all ready been fired at the collonist in several different cities on a couple of different dates. Not to mention the military was all ready forcing quarter on the population and the troop build up was in full swing to enforce law by means of millitary force and oppresion. Plus bounty were all ready put out for any and all rebels with higher amounts for specific individuals. It was very clear that full out revolution was on the horizon, and you don’t wait till you are crushed before arming your self.

  35. Doug Reply

    July 6, 2015 at 12:04 pm

    God Bless America and those who fought and will fight to defend our freedoms. If this is not Dejavue I do not know what would be. A repeat of history is upon us and it is going to be train wreck to say the least. When will our government and the liberals understand what the basic foundation of this country is and what freedom means to true Americans.

  36. R Reply

    July 5, 2015 at 10:27 am

    Remember: for a long time, Republican = today’s Democrat then.

    Don’t be an idiot.

    • Jason Reply

      November 15, 2015 at 3:14 pm

      No. Republicans then equals Republicans now.

      Remember in 1965 Republican politicians were 94% in favour of civil rights for blacks, while support among Democrats was 73%.

      Don’t be an idiot.

  37. Pingback: Do You Really Need An AR-15 When the SHTF?-The Prepper Dome

  38. Pingback: Today is Patriots’ Day | Men Out-of-Work Blog

  39. Pingback: Ego VeroToday is Patriots' Day - Ego Vero

  40. Pingback: Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston! - Political Wrinkles

  41. Pingback: Do You Really Need An AR-15 When the SHTF?

  42. Pingback: Do You Really Need An AR-15 When the SHTF?

  43. ivette Reply

    August 20, 2014 at 11:19 am

    This is what i think. America has lost its Americanship….Our Government and President just pour to much on their platter and when stuffed now they wana put the plate to the side as watching it spoil. America ALLOWS what it says that it does not want to allow happen. America cries wolf too much….i do believe that all that has happened on Earth will makes its way back around. Like throwing a bottle in the Oceans….itll works its way back to land. Im sure life like Bonanza will come around again. ” Cowboy” America should worry about adding jobs and our Agriculture….

  44. Pingback: communication and social conflict | The Sullen Bell

  45. Randall Reno Reply

    April 25, 2014 at 9:44 am

    Thought for a minute my son would be going awol to join me in Tennessee to fight for freedom :) awesome satire

  46. Pingback: SEVENTY-TWO KILLED Resisting Gun Confiscation In Boston!! | Try Challenges

  47. Grace Reply

    March 18, 2014 at 7:18 pm

    I was so upset when I read this and thought that his had taken place at this time. The message is profound.

  48. Pingback: 72 killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *