Why do the US government want to take peoples guns away?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Serious question, I want to know what people think the government would do if the citizens were disarmed. Just your whole take on that scenario.

What would be the tipping point before a civil war broke out? I get the impression that many people here would take up arms and fight, at what point? How far can the gov't push it before it snaps?




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
One of two things happen, government restricts guns, purchases, sales, and people buy them anyway, just like what happened with Prohibition. Civil war may start, but first rallies and protests against it and in the end we end up with what we want.

Two, government bans guns, takes them away, and then locks everyone up in fema camps for possessing them.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
But why would they want to do that? I've heard about these FEMA camps, they don't look like nice places...concentration camps or prisons more like...kinda sinister I agree.

With what aim, what's the ultimate plan do you think?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Why does the US Government want to take people's guns away?

Because you never want armed slaves.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by samerulesapply
 





Why do the US government want to take peoples guns away?


Wouldn't the govt. stop the retail sales of guns before they start taking them away? I can go into the sporting goods section of any walmart and still buy guns and ammunition.

I don't think the govt. wants to stop a multi billion dollar a year industry. Do you?

edit on 19-12-2012 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   
You know, I've read some theories over the years. I heard once that the government want to kill off some 85% of the population. Would the remaining 15% be enough to keep the elite comfortable and happy?

I think it's a kinda stupid plan, myself. I know Hitler tried and was relatively succesful with a similar ploy, dunno if he worked towards a percentage or what. If our governments get so much out of controlling and manipulating us en masse then why would they want to get rid of us.

Would this not have a dramatic effect on the planet? 85% less humans? Perhaps not in urban areas, which we've mostly destroyed and polluted...but in rural areas, jungles, mountains...are we not in some ways part of the eco system? I don't actually know, I'm sure we contribute in some way, or perhaps the world would thrive in our absence, but for the remaining 15% and the elite enslaving them, hmm. A lot of wasted space, sorry...just pondering, really, something I've thought about from time to time.

People really fear the government, think they want to do us all in, I think for the most part we're worth more to them alive.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by samerulesapply
 




With what aim, what's the ultimate plan do you think?

Have you watched the goings on with the budget cliff?
There is no plan!
These guys can't agree on a simple budget for the past 3 years and you think they could agree on the next conspiracy?

The public will always have guns. Maybe not assault rifles. There is no way they could force the population into FEMA camps with all the hand guns out there.

Besides those FEMA camps are only sinister on conspiracy websites. But everything is sinister on conspiracy sites.
I'll bet there's more than a few who would welcome one of those camps around NYC.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Why do the US government want to take peoples guns away?


It's NOT the government.

It's those who have taken CONTROL of the government along with everything else...


One group and one group alone is responsible for virtually all wars and bloodshed on the face of this planet. This evil cabal is few in numbers but, like a deadly octopus, its tentacles reach out to grip and strangle untold multitudes of innocent victims. The initiates of every secret society and internationalist organization, from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Jesuits to the Bilderbergers and the Order of Skull & Bones, obey the dictates of this sinister group and tremble when standing before its leaders.

The cabalist group I refer to is the Synagogue of Satan, an ancient, yet modern, elite so politically powerful and so fabulously wealthy that even past history has been twisted, reshaped, and revised to meet its preferred version of humanity's gloomy, totalitarian future.

Religious in nature, the Synagogue of Satan is, at its essence, a grotesque, satanic cult. It's high council is composed of High Priests of Lucifer; these are men who literally worship death while practicing sexual magick and occult rituals of the blackest nature.

The Synagogue of Satan



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Perhaps because the economy is going to hit rock bottom soon and they don't want a bunch of angry armed citizens with guns trying to crash down the door?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by olaru12
 


Yeah, I kinda agree...I think the government mostly want people to have guns, you get the odd politician or whatever campaigning against them - could be genuine, could be a show...smoke and mirrors, right.

The government know they can take liberties from time to time without an uprising - they know most folk would buckle under heavy gunfire by trained armies, not all but most. I think they want people to have guns.

They could just do it now, really. Any day now, we couldn't really do much other than stand together...I'm sure it'd be a massacre but what would they have if they wiped us all out?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


You're absolutely right, good point.

I've only ever really seen or heard of these fema camps on conspiracy sites, youtube vids, etc. I dunno what they're for, who occupies them, nothing.

And if I'm perfectly honest enough I only just now realised I'd never actually taken an objective approach to that issue until now...thanks. Not that I'm particularly interested in the subject of FEMA camps, but worth thinking about I suppose. Wonder what other sources of information one might turn up that are not put out there by conspiracy nuts and other like minded folks.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
For a Government as corrupt as ours (absolutely and completely) is thought to be better to have the citizenry as passive, as dumbed down, and as helpless as possible.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan
Perhaps because the economy is going to hit rock bottom soon and they don't want a bunch of angry armed citizens with guns trying to crash down the door?


I can buy that, makes mnre sense than so they can kill us all or enslave us all. We're already slaves, really. We're bound by the laws of the land we occupy and have to play by the rules laid out by the law and society, we mostly have to work and pay contributions to the system, and get punished if we step out of line.

A few of the slaves are quite happy with the situation and don't mind much, I do my best but I kind of mind from time to time. Life's mostly good for me and I'm kinda thankful for that, but it ain't so sweet for everyone, probably more fortunate than most to be frank.

If I thought there was a viable alternative to how we live now, where we'd have more freedom, less control - great, let's have it. But I dunno what it's be, or how it would work. So I'm a reluctantly happy slave, I work hard most of the time and sail by comfortably, it's the best compromise for me, but it's a cosy bubble that could be well due to burst...it's a scary thought but if it happens we'll deal with it.

I'm in the UK, we don't often see guns where I live, I know that in some parts like Manchester and London you get more gun crime, but here it's mostly knives.

I don't know if we have FEMA camps here, or a british equivalent, never thought to look into it that much.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
This to me is very interesting as I don't consider the US to have more freedoms, and a more unequal and less desirable system than Canada overall. Yet they have guns, and we have more controlled firearms.

I think their technology with Tesla HAARP and various HZ, Scalar, and Microwave, not to mention any other developed weaponry, means that they can take out whole crowds or pinpoint anyone and that all the private stockpile is pretty useless. So to me, this is actually a semblance of freedom and something that keeps Americans happy giving them a false pretext of freedom all the while the world is already run by the shadow government, and everything is just a money making scheme, trauma and fear tactics, and diversions.

However, there is one scenario where disarming may be advantageous (though they then lose the semblance of freedoms that keep the population docile) and that is if indeed they plan on depopulating, through crashed economy, starvation, unfair distributions and Serve and Protect mode in some kind emergency, of their own creation, with technology that affects earth geologically and/or with war machines and bombs. It doesnt matter how they intend on depopulating, sooner or later people will wisen up and stop dying willingly for them and surround all the public offices and their underground bases with all the armery they have, and they may be trying to offset such a thing now.

Its not going to work. For if indeed they harm people they're going to answer, they're not off the hook.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by samerulesapply
 

The government thrives when it has a "monopoly of force" over its citizenry. The plan to disarm goes back 50 years and needs to happen before they can fully implement Agenda 21 (where your private property, especially in rural areas, is at stake).



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


You might be right...I don't know - why would it take 50 years to implement this plan? If they were planning this for 50 years...why continue to produce and make available better guns? Surely it would have made sense to gradually slow down or simply stop production...not so many citizens would be armed.

I don't think this has been planned for 50 years...if it has, it hasn't been planned all that well.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by samerulesapply
 

It is over 51 years now actually (1961). Look up State Dept Document 7277. Basically the plan is to a) have a UN Global Peace Keeping Force that will be fully armed, b) nation states will be disarmed except for that required by law enforcement for maintaining law and order, c) all over weapons (including civilian firearms) will be collected and destroyed. National sovereignty is being attacked also and total civilian disarmament is a means to that end. Read it and weep.
edit on 19-12-2012 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Why would I weep, exactly? Does it answer my question? Why would they continue to allow people to arm themselves with better weapons for 50 years then try and take them away?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by samerulesapply
 

This is a long term concept and was well before its time in the 1960s. The people have been resistant to such change and they needed gun violence to create the conditions to be able to start their gun grab. It required decadence in society (hip-hop gangsta rap, 3D shooting simulation video games, etc) to set the stage. Concomitant to this attack on 2A is the progressive rise of socialism in our country.
edit on 19-12-2012 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Right...so the plan they came up with 50 years ago was to create a situation where people could buy a load of guns, and bombard them with gangster rap, 3d shootemups, actions movies, etc..until they love their guns enough to kill for them - then take their guns away...I get it now.

Only kidding, I don't really.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join