FReeper Patriots, your Contributions make all the difference!
Please keep ‘em coming! Thank you all very much!
Posted on 01/27/2013 9:05:33 AM PST by EXCH54FE
In the ongoing fevered debate over gun control legislation, registration of firearms is a key flashpoint. “Progressives” insist that nothing could be more reasonable and benign than simply requiring every firearm and firearm owner to be registered with some government entity. Thus, bad guys could be screened out and guns used in crimes could be traced to help catch the criminals. They denounce as paranoid, delusional nonsense the concerns of gun owners that registration would lead to eventual confiscation.
In a “Fact Check” at Time.com intended to dismiss “The Gun Registry Red Herring,” Michael Scherer notes that President Obama’s “Now Is The Time” gun plan issued on January 16 does not call for a federal gun registry. However, the Time piece does acknowledge that in a 2001 interview Obama, then a state senator, stated: “I’ll continue to be in favor of handgun law registration requirements and licensing requirements for training.”
It is reasonable to believe that President Obama still holds to those views and is, at this point, taking a slower, more pragmatic, step-by-step approach to get momentum going in the direction of more expansive firearms restrictions.
Leaving that reasonable speculation aside, however, it is clear that gun rights advocates are far from delusional in suspecting that gun registration might be used to actually confiscate firearms that had previously been deemed legal. First of all, there is the historical record in one country after another. In the past century alone, fascist and communist regimes have used gun registration (oftentimes enacted by previous democratic governments) to identify gun owners and implement confiscation. In Canada, Australia, and many countries of Europe, gun registration has led to confiscation in recent years. It is happening here in the United States with state laws, as the recently passed legislation in New York State demonstrates.
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...
All semantics about Gun Control versus its new brother, Gun Violence aside, nearly every one of these political proponents who are espousing common sense Gun Violence action have at one time or another in their miserable, pitiful, evil political careers have whispered “take all the guns” to those selected few supporters at one time or another.
BOOKMARK
The purpose of registration is not gun confiscation. The purpose is to have ready a list of of potential troublemakers once the left decides to go all the way in pushing its Marxist agenda.
Earlier this month, Geraldo asked a caller: “How could you not trust your own government?”
Putting aside big and little episodes of trustworthy government in the history of this country like the Trail of Tears, the interment of Americans of Japanese decent, Kent State, Waco, Fast and Furious and the Bengzai Coverup, I seem to recall Geraldo himself complaining about how the US has treated his native Puerto Rico. But his question diverts our attention. The issue isn’t the relative peace at this instant. The issue is the very nature of government itself.
History is full of governments that ran sufficiently amok as to have become a mortal danger to their own citizens. Indeed, the last centry was so full of episodes of government murdering their own citizens by deliberate official policy that it spawned a new word: democide.
Many in the media who reject American Exceptionaism want us to believe instead that the only exceptionalism left in America is to be found in her government. In how easy they dismiss the Second Amendment as being obsolete, they are telling us that there are no circumstances whatsoever in that some future government could ever run amok. They are willing to stake the lives of their children and grandchildren on that assertion.
Certainly people want to have a trustworthy government. But it concerns me that more than one member of the President’s inner circle has publicly praised China’s Mao, a man responsible for the brutal deaths of over 40 million Chinese citizens. [1,2] I am shocked that a close advisor to the president has favorably quoted Mao’s warning that [political] power comes from the barrel of a gun. [3] It is chilling to see a Mao-themed ornament on a White House Christmas tree, or the number of people who support this administration who also voice approval of the murderous Che Guevara [4,5] It is incongruous that a man who was a leader of a group that contemplated the necessity of murdering 25 million Americans who might reject political reeducation after this group took over the country is now a frequent visitor to the White House. [6,7]
Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security is busy building up a stockpile of two billion rounds of hollow point pistol ammunition. [8] The very government that Geraldo implies we must trust is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to address a contingency that cannot be explained by current trends. The shocking implication is not who does DHS intent to shoot, but why. Even if this plan devoted 100 rounds to each of these anticipated targets, two billion rounds implies a contingency involving armed action against 20 million people. How many in government anticipate the need to kill 20 million people out of a population of 310 million? Is this the same 20 or so million the Weather Underground anticipated needing to eliminate?
How should I evaluate these facts? As disconnected random coincidences or as a glimpse of the plans of those in power and those who cheer them on?
Last year in Missouri and Minnesota alone, about a million people bought licenses to harvest deer with high powered rifles. About one million Pennsylvanians hunt deer with firearms. Nationally, there are far more deer hunters than government employees of any kind. There are one million Floridians licensed to carry concealed firearms. As long as the relationship between public servants and the public they serve is healthy, then we all can enjoy the blessings of liberty, which was the core reason we formed the federal government in the first place.
But what happens when the public servant thinks he is the public master instead?
Nobody can predict how a future government might endanger our own descendants by running amok. For example, what social, political or legal forces exist today that would stop another Trail of Tears that were not sufficient to stop it the first time? Certainly firearms aren’t the answer to every outrage, or even most. Even though we are all civilized, and strive to be peaceful and polite to everyone, I cannot allow the precious right to keep and bear arms to end with my generation. My future grand children might curse me for neglecting to preserve the very tool they might need most during some urgent crisis in their lives, even though no learned member of the news media could possibly envision such a thing at this moment.
I recall a time when the finest, award winning journalists of their time, like the New York Time’s own Walter Duranty, could not bring themselves to report that Stalin was deliberately starving millions of Ukrainian farmers to death as an act of government policy. Did Duranty and the Times choose to lie because they believed they were serving a higher cause at the time? Is this like when members of today’s media lie about firearms because they are serving a higher cause today? And when some future government they support runs amok and thousands (or millions) die because they have run out of ways to resist, how will the media report it? Like they glowingly talk about the exploits of Che Guevara or Bill Ayers, who they tell us is just a neighbor of the current President?
[1] link: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/17/Obama-debate-advisor-Anita-Dunn-Mao
[2] Another Communist in Obama’s Orb Meet Michael Klonsky, Obama’s “social justice” education expert. By Andrew C. McCarthy. Link: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226071/another-
communist-obamas-orb/andrew-c-mccarthy
[3] The Political Thought of Van Jones. Link: https://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/2009/09/05/the-
political-thought-of-van-jones/
[4] White House Christmas Decor Featuring Mao Zedong Comes Under Fire. Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/23/white-house-christmas-decor-featuring-mao-zedong-comes/
[5] When treason talks....Rep. Diane Watson praises Che Guevara, Castro and communism. link:
http://www.examiner.com/article/when-treason-talks-rep-diane-watson-praises-che-guevara-castro-and-communism
[6] FBI informant Larry Grathwohl on Ayers’ plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ
[7] Obama Mentor Wanted Americans Put In Re-Education Camps, Weather Underground terrorist planned
to eliminate 25 million U.S. citizens in re-education camps. by Paul Joseph Watson.
link: http://www.infowars.com/obama-mentor-wanted-americans-put-in-re-education-camps/
[8] DHS adds another 200,000 rounds to its 2 billion round stockpile. Washington Examiner, January 4, 2013. Link: http://www.examiner.com/article/dhs-adds-200-000-rounds-to-its-2-billion-round-stockpile
Question to any who think that registration will not lead to confiscation: How come politicians are exempt?
Not one could pass a background check. Between the drugs, pedophilia, criminal use of office, etc. most of them belong in jail and the rest put on a deserted island.
Yeah, I really do trust the gvernment./s
Actually, no. Ubama's "views" start out as benign lies for the purpose of getting elected and then "evolve" to suit his true political agenda. Like homo "marriage" for example. This foul piece of sh** Ubama wants complete confiscation of all guns, make no mistake about it. He just can't say it yet.
i sold my guns. really i did
I’ve been a multiple gun owner for decades. I just do not agree. Will the try and regulate the H*** out of them? Absolutely. Come for them? Well . . . again, I just don’t agree.
Excellent article, EXCH54FE.
Thanks very much.
OUTSTANDING!!!
Sir, I am with you and I still have only one thing to say:
MOLON LABE
I believe you're correct. Coming for them would be stupid.
It's much more likely that they will make them illegal and then prosecute gun owners (new criminals) as they wish.
Once everyone is a criminal they can do whatever they want, justified by the law.
Gun Registration is Gun Confiscation
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/gun-registration-is-gun-confiscation.html
I heard that show. Mike Huckabee was on a little later and when Gerald asked him the same question he totally turned the tables on him. He came back with something like "actually I'm wondering why this government doesn't trust the people."
You are very Welcome.
“If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
MOLON LABE
When they come for the Fudd guns, they won’t call them “hunting” or “sporting” rifles. They’ll call them “armor peircing” “sniper” rilfes who’s only purpose is to kill.
They won’t call them “birding” or “trap” guns, they call them “street sweepers” and “scatter guns” with more power than anyone needs to shoot a duck...
Ask a Branch Davidian about “trusting” the government.
“Progressives” insist that nothing could be more reasonable and benign than simply requiring every firearm and firearm owner to be registered with some government entity.”
Registration? “Progressives,” I got your answer right here:
Hold one hand out in front of you and wish, and cup one behind you and see which gets filled fastest.
You don’t frighten us, pig dogs. Go and boil your bottoms, you sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, so-called “progressives” you and all your silly left peoples.
Go and boil your bottoms, you sons of silly persons! I unplug my nose my nose redux at you! Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
Ha ha, ho ho.
Beltway Overlords: The invitation remains open. We won’t bring them to you, but you are welcome to (try to) come and get them.
In putting forth something for liberals to answer, I want to use the issues that liberal themselves have used in the past. Waco does not count with them because it was a “cult” and cults are weird and icky and well anything we can do go get rid of cults is OK. But how the government got rid of Native Americans was a different matter entirely, at least to liberals.
Ask the American indian.
Regulate and ban firearms + registration + confiscation. Add in incremental small amounts to prevent a catastrophic explosive reaction. Make a harsh example out of the few hardliners through demonizing, isolating and targeting. Make government "entitlements" dependent on all of the above. End state: Turn citizens into subjects slaved to the state.
The retention of freedom and liberty requires constant vigilance.
.
Sounds like the Earl Turner era!
It's much more likely that they will make them illegal and then prosecute gun owners (new criminals) as they wish.
Once everyone is a criminal they can do whatever they want, justified by the law.
The problem is, if one is going to be in for a penny, so to speak, what prevents them being from being in for a pound? If I'm going down for just owning one, I might as well use it for its intended purpose.
The “Good Germans”, (AKA Liberals) in today's America would have no problem reporting their Gun Owning Neighbors to the proper Authorities, of that I have no doubt.
BTW - Yesterday I was talking to a couple of typical “pay no attention” Americans about the Gun Grabber Obama. They said, you don't really think Obama wants to take your guns, do you? We get it, but it is obvious many others don't.
***... “How could you not trust your own government?”***
Perhaps this is why.
And to think, in 1962 Thomas J Dodd and Emaual Cellar proposed the first federal law on common firearms.
1962; “We don’t want to take away your guns, we ONLY want to register handguns! Rifles and shotguns will not be affected”.
1964: “We only want to register all your guns, not ban them! Only Army surplus guns will be banned.”
1968: “We only want to register your guns, and ban “Saturday Night Specials” and small foreign handguns along with army surplus rifles!” (They got the ban on 5 shot army surplus rifles and handguns and small foreign pistols)
1970: “We only want to ban Saturday night specials! large handguns and rifles will not be affected!” There was also a call at this time to ban all private possession of ALL GUNS.
1976: “We only want to ban all handguns! Long guns will not be affected!”
1981: “The NRA should give up their handguns, and they can keep their rifles!”- Lee Grant on GMA
1984: “We must ban “assault Rifles, unsuitable or hunting!”
1989: George Bush bans import of foreign made “assault rifles”.
1992: Assault rifle ban passed by Clinton.
2000: first calls to ban single shot .50 cal rifles...
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED!
I have one OB butt kisser at work who keeps saying, “They have to do something”.
Dumb @ss says that most criminals run at the sight of a gun so you don’t need large mags. I countered with what if the don’t run, then what? I also pointed out that a lot of people can soak up rounds and still are able to do damage to you.
The Woman who put five .38 Slugs into the Thug a few weeks ago proves the point. Luckily for her and her Children, he was the only intruder.
The guy walked out of the house. I guess he didn’t know if the Woman was reloading and thought it best to leave. Thus proving that the only response is an Armed Response.
Next question to the Obama lover, who is THEY? If History serves, the THEY that disarmed the Citizens of their respective Countries were either Fascists, Communists or Nazis. Which group does your Coworker identify with?
In a sense I’d say they’re right. He’s probably not going to literally take our guns away. But that’s only because he knows the political conditions aren’t right for it. He understands incrementalism. What he actually is going to do is everything in his power to move things in that direction, to lay the foundation for much stricter controls and possibly even confiscation later. Unfortunately this is a subtler point that probably won’t register with the pay no attention types.
And Japanese-Americans.
I avoid talking to him except for business. I mostly listen to him talk to his other OB worshipers. I think its a mental disorder because not much of what they say makes any sense to me.
People are paying attention. The local gun stores have been packed since the election. The only ones with their heads in the sand are truly stupid.
I know two sets of people. One set is stocking up supplies and setting up their bug out locations and the other group is saying things are OK and they are buying houses.
It isn’t the government’s business to know how many guns I have any more than it is for them to know how many lawn sprinklers I have.
Unless ended (like we did up her in Canuckistan),
Registration ALWAYS
leads to CONFISCATION!
Work that into a chant, and let the fools KNOW!
Some wild dogs stole my guns. Yeah, they clawed their way into my house and took off with them. Filthy mutts.
That is one of the all time best posts that I have seen in a long time.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer “Present” or “Not guilty.” Theodore Roosevelt
MOLON LABE
Gun grabbers always start speaking like this:
“First of all I want everybody in this room to know that I am a gun owner and I hunt, however....”
Obama's daughters can go to school without needing armed guards and many famous people will no longer require armed guards as well.
Not in Texas or Montana. But in some states, yes. We shall see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.