Head's UP ! B.Miller and Heeding God's Call planning new gun shop protests !

[son of the revolution]

Hey, just saw a mention of this over on Sebastians site " Snowflakesinhell"

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Philad...e/236075819633


Anyway, seems Heeding God's Call has a new FaceBook site where they are planning new protests of gun stores in Philly.

I dont use FaceBook , but it seems for now at least the comments are open. Im sure that will change sometime soon when they get bombarded by pro gun posts. It would be nice though for someone to friend them so we as a group can keep up with their plans and maybe counter protest, or at least get to the media that are sure to show up.

One location is

Delia's Gun Shop
6104 Torresdale Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19135-3718
(215) 332-7733‎


The other is

Mike & Kates Sports Shopp
(215) 745-7740
7492 Oxford Ave, Philadelphia, PA 19111


No dates annouced as of yet. And if anyone hasnt already seen my article that completley deconstructs Miller and his phony use of religon , feel free to look here


http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/857...ml#post1054119


We gotta start getting at least SOME people to show up where these clowns are and stop letting them have the media unquestioningly drool all over them.

[adymond]

Gee, I wonder who would have seen this coming? I mean I am SURE nobody said anything like this would happen when Colisimo's closed down due to these clowns and the BATFE (was that redundant?). I mean we were all just elated that a shady place like Colisimo's got shut down.

Fuck me six ways to Sunday. These shitstains aren't going to stop until they either get their way or a store owner stands up to them effectively.

[son of the revolution]

Gee, I wonder who would have seen this coming? I mean I am SURE nobody said anything like this would happen when Colisimo's closed down due to these clowns and the BATFE (was that redundant?). I mean we were all just elated that a shady place like Colisimo's got shut down.

Fuck me six ways to Sunday. These shitstains aren't going to stop until they either get their way or a store owner stands up to them effectively.

Which is EXACTLY why our side needs to take this seriously and start mobilizing to get to these demonstrations and show the store owners we " have their back "

[adymond]

Which is EXACTLY why our side needs to take this seriously and start mobilizing to get to these demonstrations and show the store owners we " have their back "

That's what I was trying to say in the old thread (I can't find the damn thing now) about Colosimo's. Sadly there were more people interested in bashing the shop than trying to defend it from thuggish behavior.

[LorDiego01]

...I am SURE nobody said anything like this would happen when Colisimo's closed down due to these clowns and the BATFE ...

That's what I was trying to say in the old thread (I can't find the damn thing now) about Colosimo's. Sadly there were more people interested in bashing the shop than trying to defend it from thuggish behavior.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Colosimo's was brought down from the inside.

Bad prices. Worse customer service, and a LOT of his guns were somehow ending up in the hands of criminals.

Again, I never shopped there, and the one phone call I did make to them ensured that I would never, ever spend my money at that shop.

[son of the revolution]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Colosimo's was brought down from the inside.

Bad prices. Worse customer service, and a LOT of his guns were somehow ending up in the hands of criminals.

Again, I never shopped there, and the one phone call I did make to them ensured that I would never, ever spend my money at that shop.

Colosimo's definetely had a pretty bad rap , but if I recall the story correctly , he finally gave in when they ratcheted up their protests by actually going into the store and raising hell, all because he refused to give into their extortion attempt to sign some " pledge " they dreamed up.

Funny side note, my Dad grew up in Philly and actually worked for Colosimo's back in the late 60's ,early 70's . He was supposed to be opening up a Camden Branch for them as the store manager and was hit and seriously injured on his motorcycle the day before he was to drive over the bridge and get the new stores stock picked up.

He used to tell me back in the day they had holsters nailed to the underside of the counter every few feet with a loaded pistol in them. He also told stories of firing Full Auto toys in some basement or back room ad hoc range they had.

[son of the revolution]

I can keep track of them through facebook & post the dates of their demonstrations. If I can make it to the shops on those dates I'll counter-protest, even if I'm the only person doing so.

PLEASE , thats great if your volunteering and are going to stick with this ! Keep everyone here in the loop on their plans. If I can get someone to watch the kids when the wife is working I'll be there shoulder to shoulder with you and trying like hell to get the media to start asking serious quuestions of Miller.

[BanginBonnie2]

Which is EXACTLY why our side needs to take this seriously and start mobilizing to get to these demonstrations and show the store owners we " have their back "

S OtR,



Has anyone determined the ownership of the Websites/Domains being used .. if Church facilities / property / funds are being used ?

Reason I ask ... maybe the Tough Guys at the I R S might have a little to say about a 501 (c) infraction for a Tax Exempt Organization violating Commerce Laws ... they are after all, intent on shuttering this mans biz .. if they were actually against Gun Violence as they purport, they'd be hounding the BATF for stricter enforcement, asking BATF to shut them down for violations

... apparently the Violations are Non-Existent or the Feds would have padlocks on the doors.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicj85.pdf


(4) Planning Illegal Acts
Not only is the actual conduct of illegal activities inconsistent with exemption, but the planning and sponsoring of such activities are also incompatible with charity and social welfare. Rev. Rul. 75-384 holds that an organization formed to promote world peace that planned and sponsored protest demonstrations at which members were urged to commit acts of civil disobedience did not qualify for IRC 501(c)(3) or (4) exemption. G.C.M. 36153, dated January 31, 1975, states that because planning and sponsoring illegal acts are in themselves inconsistent with charity and social welfare it is not necessary to determine whether illegal acts were, in fact, committed in connection with the resulting demonstrations or whether such a determination can be made prior to conviction of an accused. However, it is necessary to establish that the planning and sponsorship are attributable to the organization, if exemption is to be denied or revoked on this ground.
B. Promotion of Social Welfare
The conduct of illegal activities to a substantial degree is also a bar to exemption under IRC 501(c)(4). Reg. 1.501(c)(4)-1(a)(2)(i) provides that an organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general welfare of the people of the community. It is an organization that is operated primarily for the purpose of bringing about the civic betterments and social improvements. Illegal activities, which violate the minimum standards of acceptable conduct necessary to the preservation of an orderly society, are contrary to the common good and the general welfare of the people of the community and thus are not permissible means of promoting social welfare for purposes of IRC 501(c)(4). Rev. Rul. 75-384, 1975-2 C.B. 204.
C. Strikes, Boycotts, Picketing, Mass Demonstrations, and Other Confrontational Activities
It is generally recognized that activities designed to preserve and protect the natural environment for the benefit of the public promote a charitable purpose within the meaning of (C)(3)-1 Reg. 1.501 (c)(3)-1(d)(2). Typically, such activities include saving land for food production, maintaining clean waterways, conserving energy, protecting endangered animal species from extinction or cruelty, and preserving historical buildings. Congress has recognized that promotion of conservation and protection of natural resources serve a broad public interest. See Rev. Rul. 80-278, 1980-2 C.B. 175; the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. Section 4321 (1976); and Rev. Rul. 76-204, 1976-1 C.B. 152, and the authorities cited therein.
Often IRC 501(c)(3) organizations of the type described above engage in activities designed to force an unrelated party to act or refrain from acting in a way that the organizations believe will assist them in the accomplishment of their purposes. Questions arise as to whether these activities, such as strikes, economic boycotts, picketing, and mass demonstrations, are permissible methods of furthering educational or charitable purposes. In determining whether activities of this type are consistent with IRC 501(c)(3), the Service relies on a three-part test. Rev. Rul. 80-278. Such activities will be considered permissible under IRC 501(c)(3) if:
(1)
The purpose of the organization is charitable;
(2)
the activities are not illegal, contrary to a clearly defined and established public policy, or in conflict with express statutory restrictions; and
(3)
the activities are in furtherance of the organization's exempt purpose and are reasonably related to the accomplishment of that purpose.
As stated above, an organization's purpose of preserving and protecting the environment is charitable within the meaning of IRC 501(c)(3). Therefore, if such activities as economic boycotts, mass demonstrations, and picketing, etc., further the purposes of the organization and are not illegal, contrary to public policy, or in conflict with express statutory restrictions or limitations, they will not preclude IRC 501(c)(3) exemption. Whether the activities are in furtherance of an organization's IRC 501(c)(3) purposes and whether they are illegal or contrary to public policy are primarily matters of fact. Rev. Rul. 75-384, 1975-2 C.B. 204, holds that a non-profit organization formed to promote world peace and disarmament by nonviolent direct action and whose primary activity is the sponsoring of anti-war protest demonstrations in which demonstrators are urged to ...



... well, I guess you get the thought ... is using the Church, the Church's property, website, etc a Violation of Tax Code ?

.... a Violation of Commerce Codes ?

Didn't David Koresh have a small ' Tax Problem ? ? ?

Take Care

[son of the revolution]

S OtR,



Has anyone determined the ownership of the Websites/Domains being used .. if Church facilities / property / funds are being used ?

Reason I ask ... maybe the Tough Guys at the I R S might have a little to say about a 501 (c) infraction for a Tax Exempt Organization violating Commerce Laws ... they are after all, intent on shuttering this mans biz .. if they were actually against Gun Violence as they purport, they'd be hounding the BATF for stricter enforcement, asking BATF to shut them down for violations

... apparently the Violations are Non-Existent or the Feds would have padlocks on the doors.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicj85.pdf


(4) Planning Illegal Acts
Not only is the actual conduct of illegal activities inconsistent with exemption, but the planning and sponsoring of such activities are also incompatible with charity and social welfare. Rev. Rul. 75-384 holds that an organization formed to promote world peace that planned and sponsored protest demonstrations at which members were urged to commit acts of civil disobedience did not qualify for IRC 501(c)(3) or (4) exemption. G.C.M. 36153, dated January 31, 1975, states that because planning and sponsoring illegal acts are in themselves inconsistent with charity and social welfare it is not necessary to determine whether illegal acts were, in fact, committed in connection with the resulting demonstrations or whether such a determination can be made prior to conviction of an accused. However, it is necessary to establish that the planning and sponsorship are attributable to the organization, if exemption is to be denied or revoked on this ground.
B. Promotion of Social Welfare
The conduct of illegal activities to a substantial degree is also a bar to exemption under IRC 501(c)(4). Reg. 1.501(c)(4)-1(a)(2)(i) provides that an organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general welfare of the people of the community. It is an organization that is operated primarily for the purpose of bringing about the civic betterments and social improvements. Illegal activities, which violate the minimum standards of acceptable conduct necessary to the preservation of an orderly society, are contrary to the common good and the general welfare of the people of the community and thus are not permissible means of promoting social welfare for purposes of IRC 501(c)(4). Rev. Rul. 75-384, 1975-2 C.B. 204.
C. Strikes, Boycotts, Picketing, Mass Demonstrations, and Other Confrontational Activities
It is generally recognized that activities designed to preserve and protect the natural environment for the benefit of the public promote a charitable purpose within the meaning of (C)(3)-1 Reg. 1.501 (c)(3)-1(d)(2). Typically, such activities include saving land for food production, maintaining clean waterways, conserving energy, protecting endangered animal species from extinction or cruelty, and preserving historical buildings. Congress has recognized that promotion of conservation and protection of natural resources serve a broad public interest. See Rev. Rul. 80-278, 1980-2 C.B. 175; the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. Section 4321 (1976); and Rev. Rul. 76-204, 1976-1 C.B. 152, and the authorities cited therein.
Often IRC 501(c)(3) organizations of the type described above engage in activities designed to force an unrelated party to act or refrain from acting in a way that the organizations believe will assist them in the accomplishment of their purposes. Questions arise as to whether these activities, such as strikes, economic boycotts, picketing, and mass demonstrations, are permissible methods of furthering educational or charitable purposes. In determining whether activities of this type are consistent with IRC 501(c)(3), the Service relies on a three-part test. Rev. Rul. 80-278. Such activities will be considered permissible under IRC 501(c)(3) if:
(1)
The purpose of the organization is charitable;
(2)
the activities are not illegal, contrary to a clearly defined and established public policy, or in conflict with express statutory restrictions; and
(3)
the activities are in furtherance of the organization's exempt purpose and are reasonably related to the accomplishment of that purpose.
As stated above, an organization's purpose of preserving and protecting the environment is charitable within the meaning of IRC 501(c)(3). Therefore, if such activities as economic boycotts, mass demonstrations, and picketing, etc., further the purposes of the organization and are not illegal, contrary to public policy, or in conflict with express statutory restrictions or limitations, they will not preclude IRC 501(c)(3) exemption. Whether the activities are in furtherance of an organization's IRC 501(c)(3) purposes and whether they are illegal or contrary to public policy are primarily matters of fact. Rev. Rul. 75-384, 1975-2 C.B. 204, holds that a non-profit organization formed to promote world peace and disarmament by nonviolent direct action and whose primary activity is the sponsoring of anti-war protest demonstrations in which demonstrators are urged to ...



... well, I guess you get the thought ... is using the Church, the Church's property, website, etc a Violation of Tax Code ?

.... a Violation of Commerce Codes ?

Didn't David Koresh have a small ' Tax Problem ? ? ?

Take Care

VERY INTERESTING !! All though Im not even close to an actuary or accountant or Tax Law Policy Expert. But I will forward this to the appropriate parties to be sure. Personally I wouldnt be the least bit surprised if your theory proves to be correct. I have written proof that Bryan Miller violated IRS non profit tax regs in NJ, and he's the big dog behind HGC.

[BanginBonnie2]

VERY INTERESTING !! All though Im not even close to an actuary or accountant or Tax Law Policy Expert. But I will forward this to the appropriate parties to be sure. Personally I wouldnt be the least bit surprised if your theory proves to be correct. I have written proof that Bryan Miller violated IRS non profit tax regs in NJ, and he's the big dog behind HGC.

S OtR,

Hopefully the people responsible for attempting to shutter this mans legit biz, get a Face-to-Face with the Tax Man ... the same agency who downed Al Capone !

Take Care