He is absolutely right it isn't about guns because obviously other things kill more people.
It is about power and control and making a population to be subservient to the government the clear anti thesis of liberalism and what the founders
intended this country to be.
The severe distrust of government is why that 2nd was put in there it becomes corrupt today far too many people believe the government does no wrong,
they believe that owning a gun is pure evil.
Even tho the majority of guns ownerss have done nothing wrong gun control, and gun laws are nothing but thought crimes of what a person might do.
When in fact there is already a law on the books that covers murder, and they have more laws defining what degree of murder that is.
I am so sick of this anti gun stupidity America definately needs a reality check, but most make up their own reality as it goes along and they change
that reality to suit the political agenda.
edit on 19-12-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)
Couldn't have it put it better myself.
What we have is a sick perversion of the judicial and legislative systems and misunderstanding of their purpose by people who wish to use those
systems to quell their fears.
You make a very good point in regards to laws already being in place for these crimes....such as murder, assault with a deadly weapon etc...but the
failure of these laws are because people perceive the legal and judicial system as something to SAVE them...its not and was never intended to "stop
crime" it was intended to bring justice to those who were victimized by what is only inevitable in a free world....crime.
The legal system defined acts that created victims and the justice system defined punishment to the perpetrators of those acts in order to balance
the scales...hence the scales of justice. A perk or bonus to this was in some very small cases they acted as a deterrent....public hangings ring a
bell? Over the years the perception and function of these branches of government have gravitated more and more towards preemptive and preventative law
Take drunk driving for example...its a crime with no victim. Its a preemptive preventative law. If there is a victim of drunk driving...the crime then
is not driving drunk...its murder, vehicular homicide...which were already crimes before drinking and driving were declared crimes. If the justice
system's scales of punishment for murder will not deter people from committing those acts...then it certainly won't for something like drinking and
driving...in spite of these laws people are still drinking and driving and killing people...
The future of the legal and judicial systems is frightening if you follow the trend and direction it is heading...it is heading to this:
The people of today think that crime can be stopped and believe safety > freedom and liberties. This is the only explanation I can find for the
support of preemptive crime laws that are based on predicting the future and profiling...
Freedom isn't free...not because you have to pay taxes for it and fund an army to protect it...but because you have to be willing to lose your life
for it to maintain it. Just like after 9-11 and how it turned this country upside down...patriot acts, preemptive wars, TSA on and on...this is no
longer a country living freely...and because of this...the "terrorists" have already won.
The post 9-11 world is traumatized and fear based...terrorism around ever corner, on every channel in every small town...our world is getting smaller
and smaller our options are less and less and as our false perception of safety increases...so does our ability to call ourselves a free country whose
principals are based in independence and liberty.
hate to go on a rant....didn't mean to but I feel its all relevant.
give an inch...and they will take a mile...the government did not get as big as it is and as powerful as it is without doing so.
Registration was an inch...limiting clip size is an inch...AR ban is another inch...
inch by inch....generation by generation...
edit on 19-12-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-12-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)
I've said that it's about implementing UN Agenda 21, as Agenda 21 is about controlling all aspects of our lives, a total control of our attitudes,
freedoms, our food water and energy, land use where we can live and what we can live in, what we can drive(they envision everyone riding bikes...yikes
in cold climate...I think these nuts who devise this stuff all must live in California or Florida) and yes what weapons we can have... as in no
weapons...also Rosa Koire says in her book "Behind the Green Mask" that things like obesity, smoking, and leaving lights on will be considered
crimes. This is not far fetched. I remember a few years back, in California they were trying to pass some kooky law allowing the trash collectors to
spy on your trash and fine you if you didn't recycle properly. That is part of this Agenda 21 stuff, to force people to recycle using threats and
laws. This stuff is quite Totalitarian.
He isn't actually working under Fox's control (or MSM), he works for Raycom media which is an independent local television broadcaster who only has
Fox has an affiliate. They make their own decisions outside of Fox's influence, as they should.
This has been clarified by Ben himself in the past when people have 'questioned' whether he is 'controlled opposition' or not.
In television, there is only one thing that is cherished above all else, including 'control' and that is ratings and popularity. Since Ben Swann came
out with hard hitting news about Ron Paul and the election fraud, he caught the attention of Ron Paul supporters and liberty fighters throughout the
nation. Now he has a major internet following and I'm sure local Ohio television company, Raycom Media is happy to have a 'viral sensation' under
I'm just glad underground news like NDAA and Internet Censorship bills is starting to be accepted by television networks because of the
edit on 23-12-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.