DOJ Memo: Outlaw and Confiscate All Guns

Originally posted by hawkiye

If you believe that BS I'd like to interest you in some Prime everglades land CHEAP You'll never find a better deal then this prime property...

Because inforwars is always a great source of factual information? if you believe THAT bs I have some property in the everglades as well you might be interested in ..

Alex Jones has predicted that the US and Iran were about to go to war numerous times and that the war was to start in days according to his inside sources.. guess what? it's never happened .. not that it won't one day happen, but his track record for being a trustworthy and accurate source is horrible at best.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

A saner view
all the other CT nutjobs.

Is this a standard wide brush ad hominem tactic?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
BTW amending the constitution is not illegal.

Do you think the Constitution needs to be amended in regards to the Second and gun control?

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by hawkiye

If you believe that BS I'd like to interest you in some Prime everglades land CHEAP You'll never find a better deal then this prime property...

Because inforwars is always a great source of factual information? if you believe THAT bs I have some property in the everglades as well you might be interested in ..

Alex Jones has predicted that the US and Iran were about to go to war numerous times and that the war was to start in days according to his inside sources.. guess what? it's never happened .. not that it won't one day happen, but his track record for being a trustworthy and accurate source is horrible at best.

And we have another one... Sigh! You attack the messenger because you have nothing else. AJ is just reporting on it, so what part of the memo is not true? The NRA got hold of it the Administration acknowledged it is theirs and tried to down play it so do tell us what part of the report is not true? Fact is it is 100% true and your post was nothing but an unsubstantiated attack on the messenger and had nothing to do with the facts of the OP. Troll much do ya?

Originally posted by hawkiye
Anyone with a brain can see gun confiscation is the goal.

that's a bit insulting =)

gun confiscation isn't going to happen, there would be far too much backlash... the country already knows what happens when you try to take away something that we americans love... they tried it with alcohol and that didn't go over so well... gun confiscation would be far worse.. "anyone with a brain" can see what would likely happen if it came to that and it wouldn't be pretty... this same kind of paranoia happened when Clinton was talking gun control .. the NRA went into a frenzy, conspiracy theories were ranting and raving about what was coming.. of course reality didn't line up with any of it ..

"I'll give you my gun when you pry (or take) it from my cold, dead hands"

Charlton Heston's line from a speech in 2000 which was in response to the gun control measures back then..

The gun control measures happened.. and none of the dire predictions came true... just as they won't this time either.

Originally posted by hawkiye
And we have another one... Sigh! You attack the messenger because you have nothing else. AJ is just reporting on it, so what part of the memo is not true? The NRA got hold of it the Administration acknowledged it is theirs and tried to down play it so do tell us what part of the report is not true? Fact is it is 100% true and your post was nothing but an unsubstantiated attack on the messenger and had nothing to do with the facts of the OP. Troll much do ya?

I'm not attacking the messenger because i have nothing else.. it's just the truth that AJ reports a lot of stuff and it's usually not true.. AJ knows what brings in an audience and that is sensationalism and his famous crazy rants of "passion" .. I wouldn't care about his theatrics if he actually was providing reliable information but so much of what he says is simply not true.. his predictions don't come true, his inside sources tend to always be wrong.. but he doesn't care because he has legions of fans who love to hear him go nuts on the air.. at the end of the day, as long as he gets paid by his sponsors and sells some stuff on his online store.. he doesn't care =)

My opinion of him will change when he becomes a reputable source.

Originally posted by Tardacus

During their brainstorming sessions do they normal put illegal suggestions on the table?

For instance if they were asked to brainstorm about reducing the number of people on government assistance would they include a suggestion to create concentration camps and execute all the people on government assistance?

A suggestion to outlaw guns is just as illegal and unconstitutional as executing people in concentration camps would be.

I agree they are to "provide data on a specific area or multiple areas of interest" as some suggest, but I'm with you on how far should they go in providing data? Is destroying the Constitution and half of the Amendments really viable data?

It would be like if I suggested we make gun possession instant execution followed by all property rights now state owned, then ask "is that a little too much?".

Originally posted by miniatus
gun confiscation isn't going to happen

It has already happened, in 2005.
Katrina.

Originally posted by Sek82

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

A saner view
all the other CT nutjobs.

Is this a standard wide brush ad hominem tactic?

Only where it is applicable.

did you mean to toally ignore the substantive comment in my post and just concentrate on an unsubtle ad-hominem attack?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
BTW amending the constitution is not illegal.

Do you think the Constitution needs to be amended in regards to the Second and gun control?

no.

Is this a standard stupid question?

I just read the memo, and I can not find where is says "outlaw and confiscate all guns" anywhere. Did I miss it? Is didn't assert that conclusion, and it seems that they based the information in the memo on facts and research. Since you cannot derive data from a future eventuality, they did not include an all-out ban in their memo.

They did mention Australia's gun ban, and that there have been no mass shootings since it has been in effect, but that is not to say that Australia will never have another mass shooting.

The memo actually says that any form of gun control is marginally effective at best, given the amount of guns in circulation and the statistics relating to gun crime. In fact:

Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.

It says that since "assault weapons" are rarely used in the commission of crimes, banning them would have little effect on crime.

Personally, I am left to assume that since the memo does nothing to bolster the white house's assertions, the NRA is taking a very presumptive stance with this thing. They don't really need much more evidence of Obama's agenda that what is already out there, so why would they make such a weak argument based on a memo that is simply filled with data that essentially SUPPORTS the NRA position??

reply to post by hawkiye

Originally posted by hawkiye
This is the typical MO of the anti-gun crowd.

I am NOT anti-gun! Gout out of here with YOUR divisive rhetoric. I'm anti-panic-for-no-reason. I'm anti-sensationalism. I'm PRO-truth.

This memo promotes NOTHING. You're freaking out over nothing.

Originally posted by Tardacus

Originally posted by Hopechest
Its important to note that the National Institute of Justice is only a research and evaluation arm of the Department of Justice and have no responsibility to recommend actions on policy.

Their job is to be given a task and provide data on a specific area or multiple areas of interest. Nothing more.

It similar to the office of statistics, they just provide raw data when asked to. I assume that these questions they are providing data for are simply part of a larger request on multiple scenarios concerning gun control and simply taken out of context.

Basically if you are trying to decide on what programs would best reduce gun violence you would want to put everything on the table, collect all the known data for each option, and make the decision you think is best based on factual evidence.

I have no doubt they asked the NIJ to evaluate how much gun violence would continue to occur if nothing was done about it also.

Its just them collecting data.

During their brainstorming sessions do they normal put illegal suggestions on the table?

For instance if they were asked to brainstorm about reducing the number of people on government assistance would they include a suggestion to create concentration camps and execute all the people on government assistance?

A suggestion to outlaw guns is just as illegal and unconstitutional as executing people in concentration camps would be.

Suggestions are not agaisnt the law and of course you could put this on the table for research. It would give you a base idea to start from which is zero guns in society and allow you to base your prediction off of that. Its a point of reference.

reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
The US is heading for Financial collapse, and the last thing they want is an armed citizenry, that could become an armed revolt. do you get it now? oh and the only time i see or here of AJ or inforwars, is on this site.

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck

 

The US is heading for Financial collapse, and the last thing they want is an armed citizenry, that could become an armed revolt. do you get it now? oh and the only time i see or here of AJ or inforwars, is on this site.

Or CNN? I've looked at Infowars traffic numbers. Pretty impressive.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
I just read the memo, and I can not find where is says "outlaw and confiscate all guns" anywhere.

In this case, I have to agree. I went through the same thing with this story, and had my sights on it to bring it to ATS. But in checking it, I came up against the exact same problem. There is a disconnect between what the title says and the content of the memo. Seems like I trust infowars less and less these days. Gotta check everything anymore. And it's getting too tedious.

Sorry hawkiye, you know I'm with you bro, but I think they missed the boat on this one. I really do. It happens. Move on to the next one, best I can advise, and keep up the good fight!

The same government that is terrorising the middle east by funneling weapons to warlords to overthrow established governments, the same government that allows eric holder to funnel weapons to mexican drug cartels, the same government that refuses to prosecute 9-11 war criminals.............is the same government that wants to eventually disarm 90% of its own population of any weapon better than a .25acp beat up pistol sold in city ghettos.

The road to tyranny is incrimental. As you keep adding pieces of the puzzles together the more sense it makes and the scarier to becomes. Did I mention many/most/all of the school shootings were sensationalised by media, misreported with unchecked facts and the government was quick to capitalise on them?

And RAND of all companies doing the suggestions is truely horrific. These people usually plan for all out nuclear wars, chemical attacks, biological attacks, cia plots to overthrow governments, alien technology reverse engineering, banking, etc.

Alex Jones is no nut! He simply lost his cool after he found out what is in the making. Any rational person would!

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
I just read the memo, and I can not find where is says "outlaw and confiscate all guns" anywhere.

In this case, I have to agree. I went through the same thing with this story, and had my sights on it to bring it to ATS. But in checking it, I came up against the exact same problem. There is a disconnect between what the title says and the content of the memo. Seems like I trust infowars less and less these days. Gotta check everything anymore. And it's getting too tedious.

Sorry hawkiye, you know I'm with you bro, but I think they missed the boat on this one. I really do. It happens. Move on to the next one, best I can advise, and keep up the good fight!

Exactly. I am as pro-gun as one can get, but I think the memo only supports gun rights, and I am left scratching my head over the NRAs decision to use this as political weaponry. It screams "desperation" and that is not what the NRA needs to be broadcasting right now.

Originally posted by beezzer
Why would their recommendation, their suggestion be one of violating the 2nd Amendment?

Why?

I agree beez, it may only be a discussion but the fact that they are even having it I find troubling at best.

@ hawk I am glad I checked first I was about to make a thread about this. S+F sir. I think the important discussion to have is about the why of it all. Violating the founding document is somthing that should never be open to being an option.

reply to post by miniatus

they tried it with alcohol and that didn't go over so well...

Didn't exactly stop them from trying, did it?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Considering the DOJ track record you are the deluded one. The cover up of everyone's favorite gun walking scandal speaks volume if you weren't deaf to the message. I don't care for Alex Jones at all but considering this has also been covered in papers today, I don't feel that Jones is just crying wolf. The Gov't does not just collect data for the sake of collecting it. They collect it to gauge an agenda.

I'm sorry, but any talk of gun banning is ridiculous. I don't care if a think tank speaks of it as a possibility. Any real attempt to confiscate all guns in the US would simply lead to anarchy, civil war, or a revolution.

Nobody with half a brain would attempt it in the US for at least a generation yet. You have to sufficiently brainwash a generation to completely trash the previous beliefs and ideals. Too many US citizens own guns, and won't let them be taken away without putting up a fight.

I think this stuff is simply an attempt to gauge public support/interest/disinterest after even discussing the possibility. It's good that people are saying "hell no", (IMO) but lets not actually entertain this as a real goal for the near future. It would be absurd to think the government would seriously try this anytime soon on a national level.