I am a thinker, I like to analyze things. I have thought long and hard about this subject and while opsec is important so is standing up and speaking out, I will try and balance it. Many talk about fighting back but it might be good to read my post's on Martial Law if you have not done so.There was a lot of good comments yesterday, thanks to all who spoke out, a few points, I realize the the National Firearms Act of 1934 did not technically 'ban' full autos but bottom line is it registered them, which is a first step to banning and to be honest a $200 tax in 1934 (Great Depression) would be like a $20,000 tax today so it may as well be called a ban. Many tend to think Obama does not have the support of congress for a gun ban, maybe not but what has he done in the past 3 years to make you think he won't trample the constitution or bypass it to further his agenda.
Let me state a premise, I believe the Second Amendment is the only real tool we have to ensure our other freedoms are not trampled, don't believe me...read history. I like the saying, "armed men are citizens, unarmed men are Subjects" What I am trying to say is maybe Obama can't get support to ban 'assault rifles' for example but could he say, it's OK for you to have them we just want to register them so they can be tracked and don't fall into the wrong hands. Now let's say down the road we have a lot of civil unrest and riots, killings, looting etc. because the economy collapsed (which seems almost unavoidable) how hard would it be to declare martial law and 'round up' all the 'assault' weapons to 'protect' the police and general public. At this point it would be too late for the sheeple.
And so it is today, If you don't think the government want's to or is controlling us I need some of the dope you are smoking. They crave power and money and are well on the way to having it all.
Lets say for example Obama had the power to totally rewrite the Constitution and to pass any law his little heart desired, lets say he could confiscate all property and make us all Subjects, lets say he would be supreme ruler for life, he would have one big problem, armed citizens. Now I used Obama as an example but it could be any government and this fact remains, and they know it.
Tomorrow I may delve into some 'hypothetical situations' strictly for 'entertainment purposes only' We need to be thinking now about what we may do in the future so we won't get blindsided down the road.
Something to think about Part 1
Something to think about Part 3
Here is a short history and excerpt from:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Germany
The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current weapons law, superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens were required to have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit to acquire a firearm. Furthermore, the law restricted ownership of firearms to "...persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit." Under the new law:
Gun restriction laws applied only to handguns, not to long guns or ammunition. Writes Prof. Bernard Harcourt of the University of Chicago, "The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition."[4]
The groups of people who were exempt from the acquisition permit requirement expanded. Holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP party members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted.[5]
The age at which persons could own guns was lowered from 20 to 18.[5]
The firearms carry permit was valid for three years instead of one year.[5]
Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition.[6]
Under both the 1928 and 1938 acts, gun manufacturers and dealers were required to maintain records with information about who purchased guns and the guns' serial numbers. These records were to be delivered to a police authority for inspection at the end of each year.
On November 11, 1938, the Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, passed Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.[7]
******
Then he started killing Jews.
Those this process above look familiar? It should as we've all taken part in out version of it. We've allowed ourselves to get suckered into this permitting crap and serial number reregistration business.
Do any of you recall all the buzz about weapons for hunting? How about those that are anti-gun except for the elitists?
How about all the new taxes on ammunition?
Folks, this is the plan. They are implementing it. We've all gotten used to the President(s) using his executive orders to bypass Congress, not that he really needs to do that, as most of Congress practices treachery with the Constitution.
Here is a more in depth source.
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html
Duke, sorry for the long Nazi Rant here, but the is the best place for this as it fits in with your series of posts on this subject.
Thanks Matt, history is full of examples like this. Thanks.
DeletePreach it, Bubba, preach it, and amen. Well done.
ReplyDeleteThanks my friend, trying to do my part.
DeleteYou would think that people would know that the "Shot heard round the world" occured because the British made a grab for the locals powder supplies. The idea that the the National Guard, is somehow analogis with these militia is absolutely bizarre.
ReplyDeleteExcellent point. They went after the ammo and yes there was no National Guard at that time, only armed citizens.
ReplyDeleteThinking...
ReplyDeleteSpeaking from a land where the REAL guns were stolen before I ever had a chance to own one, I must ask "what the hell is the point of burying your guns?"
ReplyDeleteOnce prohibition has been accepted then the horse has truly bolted. You'll be able to fantasize about the day when the sheeple finally wake up and all the gun-gophers like yourself can simultaneously distribute AKs to the outraged masses, but it's just that.
A FANTASY!
I hate using CAPSlock but I have to make my point as loudly as possible so here it is!.
THE LIBERTY MOVEMENT IN AUSTRALIA CAN ROUGHLY BE SUMMED UP AS "A BUNCH OF BITTER OLD MEN WAITING FOR A DAY THAT WILL NEVER COME AND SLOWLY DYING OF PARANOIA INDUCED CANCER WHILE THEIR L1A1 RIFLES RUST AND ROT IN THE GROUND!"
That's a fact! Over here it's taken only one generation for the idea of owning a "military rifle" to have become psychotically absurd to the common jerk on the steet. 95 percent of people my age cannot believe that we were allowed to own them in the first place.
If you let them take those rifles your legacy will die. Bury them and it will rot. A slower death, but death all the same.
You have to live it to know it. I pray you never do!
p.s. The prohibition is bad, but the regulation that follow are no joke either. It's so expensive and difficult to get into "sports" shooting here in Australia that most of those initially interested don't bother. Imagine having to be fingerprinted and put permanently on file like a criminal just to own a paintball gun or air rifle. Prohibition is the gut shot, but the regulation that follows is the slow death of starvation that kills the industry. Pay a cool $1000 for a stock glock limited to 10 shots in a mag that you can only load at a recognised and govt approved range where you can't practice anything even remotely resembling combat techniques and you'll see how appealing shooting "sports" 'aint.
BANG..................BANG...................BANG
"Gee, you got a couple of bulls there and a 9"
"Yeah...*sigh*... what a rush..."
If Obama re-writes the constitution... my friends in Texas all but guarantee the secession of Texas is inevitable... and we'll emigrate to the nation of Texas at that point... ;-)
ReplyDeleteHeck, they've still got their own power grid, an armed national guard, and most of the oil/gas/diesel refineries in the country...
Dann in Ohio
I'm with you. I am sure if Texas became their own country they would have a flood of new citizens.
Delete