They don't want our guns

There's been talk since the 90's about the NWO taking away our guns. Of course, they haven't yet, and you know why?

THEY DON'T CARE!!! The NWO's control is of a psychological nature. In fact, they PREFER us having guns, because they know how to manipulate us to use them against each other and to defend THEM.

Why do they need to take away the masses' guns, when they have a hold on their minds?

reply to post by 19872012


I for one have not Conceded my " Mind " to them , but if they like , they can have my Ammo one Round at a Time.................

You are nuts if you think they dont want privately owned firearms ,the U.Ns plan is for worldwide gun registration and ultimately the elimination of privately owned firearms .Look outside the U.N there is a handgun with the barrel tied in a knot .Kofi Annan gave a speech about the weapons of ''mass destruction'' being the mass numbers of small arms .What on earth do you think the ''powers that be'' did in Tasmania that resulted in the banning of semi auto firearms in Australia ,at the same time they banned pump action shotguns .After worldwide registration occurs you will not be allowed to sell your firearm to another person, or gun shop ,once you are finished with it ,you must hand it in and it will be destroyed ! Once they have banned the Private ownership of firearms ,they can dictate to you anything they like .......... look at history, Russia ,Cambodia,China ,Germany etc, and then imagine it on a worldwide scale !! not nice is it ? But of course the naive mindless doo gooders will go along with all this, thinking they are creating a safe ,fuzzy ,new world free of nasty guns ,followed by a REPEAT of Nazi Germany on a worldwide scale !!!! You pledge your allegiance to the U.N as the only hope for the future of mankind and the planet.......... or you go off to the camps branded as a rebel ,terrorist and are eliminated .

Originally posted by bronto
You are nuts if you think they dont want privately owned firearms ,the U.Ns plan is for worldwide gun registration and ultimately the elimination of privately owned firearms .Look outside the U.N there is a handgun with the barrel tied in a knot .Kofi Annan gave a speech about the weapons of ''mass destruction'' being the mass numbers of small arms .What on earth do you think the ''powers that be'' did in Tasmania that resulted in the banning of semi auto firearms in Australia ,at the same time they banned pump action shotguns .After worldwide registration occurs you will not be allowed to sell your firearm to another person, or gun shop ,once you are finished with it ,you must hand it in and it will be destroyed ! Once they have banned the Private ownership of firearms ,they can dictate to you anything they like .......... look at history, Russia ,Cambodia,China ,Germany etc, and then imagine it on a worldwide scale !! not nice is it ? But of course the naive mindless doo gooders will go along with all this, thinking they are creating a safe ,fuzzy ,new world free of nasty guns ,followed by a REPEAT of Nazi Germany on a worldwide scale !!!! You pledge your allegiance to the U.N as the only hope for the future of mankind and the planet.......... or you go off to the camps branded as a rebel ,terrorist and are eliminated .

i just don't buy it, they would have done it by now if that was part of their agenda.

reply to post by bronto


I'm pretty sure Kofi Annan was referring to how the millions upon millions that die in this world from war die from small arms, not artillery or bombs or non-conventional weapons.

so any more thoughts
on my theory?

reply to post by 19872012


In my mind, guns are nothing more than a "Dead Man's Game". When you think about it, they're tracked quite easily. Like the little AI on computer games can 'adapt' to armament, so it can be registered electronically of personal firearms.

Those that desired could, for instance, note this and lend a confrontation, where they would have to "defend themselves". And, of course, we all know the story ends the same: the one speaking has the floor.

Interesting post; I personally don't subscribe to the NWO conspiracy theory but I would say the NWO is very much a mental thing.

As for the guns; I don't understand why so many think their guns are going to do anything if their fringe right winged dream of a "full take over of the state by a tyrannical government with martial law fema camps the whole 9 yards" were to happen.

Honestly a couple 1000 guys with some riffles, shot guns, pistols isn't going to do ANYTHING against a full USA military attack. Think if the "gov" attacked Texas.

We're talking air-strike after air-strike, stingers, assault riffles, machine guns, helicopters, drones, top of the line radar, full body armor, the highest quality snipers, and I guess if worse came to worse a nuke.

Why do these people believe that their guns will stop a truly tyrannically government?

Sometimes they compare the revolutionary war; but in that case the quality of weapons was fairly close between the domestic terrorist "founding fathers" and the British.

Sometimes they say "we will go down with a fight" which to me is outrageous. Thoughts?

reply to post by Ignorance_Defier


The fantasy of the gun-lovers/defenders is that one day they will get to be the armed insurgents fighting their own government. They want to use their pipe-bomb making skills (IEDs) and their small arms (AK-47s, for the nostalgia effect!) against the legally elected government when it tries to disenfranchise their ideology. That so many of these would-be insurgents are Christian fundamentalists that think Obama is antichrist is just one of the reasons to say this; they want to play Taliban in America.

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
reply to post by Ignorance_Defier

 

The fantasy of the gun-lovers/defenders is that one day they will get to be the armed insurgents fighting their own government. They want to use their pipe-bomb making skills (IEDs) and their small arms (AK-47s, for the nostalgia effect!) against the legally elected government when it tries to disenfranchise their ideology. That so many of these would-be insurgents are Christian fundamentalists that think Obama is antichrist is just one of the reasons to say this; they want to play Taliban in America.

I must ask. Are you in the mind set, that ALL gun owners are like that? And as gun owners, they must, in your thinking, have those kinds of fantasies? I have many friends who are gun owners, and not one of them think in that way. To me, that is nothing more than throwing all of those people into one group, and putting a label on them. If so, why? Your reasoning may be you don`t like all guns, and that is your choice, but, as it`s been said many times before about guns, it`s not guns in general that kills people, but the persons mind set using the gun that kills people. And that can be said for any object they could use that can kill or maim someone else.

So, must we do away with everything that could be used to kill each other? If so, there wouldn`t be a thing left on earth, including man.

By the way, what do you expect a Christian fundamentalist to think, having been taught that all their lives by the church?

And what happens when the people wake up from the psychological control? Which they are doing now?

reply to post by FiatLux


I'm sorry, why do gunny types want to keep their guns? It is because of the second amendment, is it not? It is because they want to be free to overthrow a government that they see as corrupt, is it not? If that's the case, then they must have imagined that they would one day be part of a militia fighting the government. Insurgents.

Not all gun owners think that they will need to take up arms against the state, and not all gun owners value guns because of the second amendment. They are useful for hunting, personal defense, and pleasure (Especially pleasure). People who worry about second amendment issues, I assume, are trying to keep their right to raise a militia for defense against a corrupt state.

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
reply to post by FiatLux

 

I'm sorry, why do gunny types want to keep their guns?It is because of the second amendment, is it not? It is because they want to be free to overthrow a government that they see as corrupt, is it not? If that's the case, then they must have imagined that they would one day be part of a militia fighting the government. Insurgents.


Not all gun owners think that they will need to take up arms against the state, and not all gun owners value guns because of the second amendment. They are useful for hunting, personal defense, and pleasure (Especially pleasure).
People who worry about second amendment issues, I assume, are trying to keep their right to raise a militia for defense against a corrupt state.

I am not sticking up for the nut case, let`s declare war shoot-'em-up types out there, but, using your thinking, why would people not have the right to stand up to, and take down a corrupt government? Is that not what the 2nd Amendment was all about, or even for? Take guns away from the people, and the corrupt government wins hands down in the end everytime. Why should people let any corrupt government fleece them like they were nothing but sheep?

So, what would you propose as a good way of getting rid of any corrupt government? If unarmed people tried to take down a corrupt goverment, and that government had guns on their side, how are those people to defend themselves? You don`t believe the government would use those guns?

reply to post by FiatLux


I never said that the second amendment was a bad thing. I simply said that those who intend to enact their second amendment rights have planned ahead, if only in fantasy, how they will become insurgents.

reply to post by 19872012


Reasons to support Gun Control:
geekpolitics.com... (Selected quotes)

1) The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

2) A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

3) When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense — give them what they want, or run” ( And hope they don't kill or rape you) (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

4) The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1791, refers to the National Guard, which was created by an act of Congress in 1903. The National Guard, funded by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state militia... wink wink

5) Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

6) Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

7) Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

8) Police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

9) Private citizens don’t need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

10) “Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them but “civilians” do not.

11) ”Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.”

12) ”If guns cause crimes, do matches cause arson?”

13) ”Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.”

And of course the intent: geekpolitics.com... (select quotes)

”Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”
~George Washington

”The right of the people to keep and bear…arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country…”
~James Madison

”A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
~George Washington

”No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
~Thomas Jefferson

”Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
~Thomas Jefferson (quoting Cesare Beccaria)

”To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
~George Mason

”The right of self-defense never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals.”
~James Monroe

”… arms … discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property…. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived the use of them.”
~Thomas Paine

”From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good”
~George Washington

”Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense.”
~John Adams

”The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
~Samuel Adams

”The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”
~Thomas Jefferson

”Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote.”
~Benjamin Franklin

”The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the underdog is a sine qua non ["something essential" lit. "without which not"] for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or police.” ~Adolph Hitler

”Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.”
~Heinrich Himmler

”This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!” ~Adolph Hitler, 1935, on The Weapons Act of Nazi Germany




And Yes, they do want our guns and right of self-defense taken away. Look at Europe.. The only thing that has stood in their way is our CULTURE which a majority of the people will not be disarmed. This was not the case in Europe/UK/Australia where a majority of the public were more than happy to surrender their rights.

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
reply to post by FiatLux

 

I never said that the second amendment was a bad thing. I simply said that those who intend to enact their second amendment rights have planned ahead, if only in fantasy, how they will become insurgents.

Planning on doing something, is one thing, doing it is another. Calling them insurgents before they have even done anything like that, is jumping the gun (no pun intended).

reply to post by FiatLux


Yes, you will notice if you read my posts that I said that they will become insurgents, or intend to become insurgents. I never said that they are insurgents.

reply to post by 19872012


I will have to agree and disagree, yes it makes perfect sense to "manipulate" the general populous, but for them to take them makes just as much sense, due to the fact that so many americans are so gun happy, that if there was a worldwide seize of our arms it would cause turmoil and the ones refusing to give up arms will be gunned down with the quickness, therefore the more people who decide to not give up arms can all be slaughtered quickly and never have to be dealt with in the camps. Thus making it almost easier on them to round us up and haul us off. I for one will go rogue and will fight to the end and they'll never get my protection. I've got it all figured out, now WE just need to figure it out and come together and fight.

Another draw back to purchased firearms: all that mumbo jumbo you see on ballistics is very true. They can ID whomever fired a shot these days, so if you bought your firearm at "Gunny's", they have your Picture, address, and all known personal interests (friends, relatives, etc.).

If your truly wanting to fend/attack, I've found it's best to not leave your 'calling card', so you can end up pre-disposed in a Court of Law, which is nothing more than a three ring circus these days, with a crepe paper clown sighting out what others in the back side-chambers have already decided. I call that the Fate Wing.

No, I'd go with another type of personal arms. And, often, they aren't even necessary to stop an opponent. The range may be considered a great advantage, but even a hint of counter-agents (ie, other incindiary particles) will throw even the most fine-tuned gunn off to inefective. I've seen that, college kids messing around on a declared hunting field--and if the burn on the powder is not up to spec.'s, you'd be better off throwing your ammunition.