DOJ Memo: Outlaw and Confiscate All Guns

reply to post by spyder550


You must have missed this posted on the previous page, The Memo
does exist, and is DOJ, and The White House acknowledges it, but does
not want to comment (much)

news.yahoo.com...

reply to post by spyder550


Clearly you're wrong. This is just more confirmation of what people with brains already know - that Obama wants to take the guns out of the hands of the American people. I had a judge tell me that the American Bar Association's official line is that the 2nd Amendment applies only to muskets, which is an impossible thing to assert if you read The Federalist Papers.

So, to you, Obamabot snake, I say: get down on your belly and crawl. It is your natural posture, like all closet Commies.

This thread is right-wing porn at its finest. I'm sure those panicking also masturbate daily to Glen Beck's lunatic and unproven rantings.

You should clarify to the inept and susceptible that this is research data meant to weigh the outcome of all possible scenarios. This is NOT policy nor are they giving any recommendations.

Its important to note that whenever ANY kind of research is done & the scientific process is applied, all possibilities must be applied and weighed. Otherwise, it is not accurate data. Not sure the OP has grasped the concept.

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
The question that keeps popping up in my head, though, is this: Why?

That's the 64 million dollar question. Why now?

Because it's on the liberal agenda and since the liberals are in charge, they're trying to make it work. The liberal agenda is to turn us into a socialist state with no chance for opposition. That means taking the guns. This is not about "gun violence." A place like Chicago, which has extremeley strict gun laws, has more gun violence than nearly anywhere else. Obviously, strict laws do not deter gun violence when you have gangs which use it as a way of life (and death.) Places like Columbine and Sandy Hook provide convenient symbols to rally around.

I know several people who are completely anti-gun. They are sincere in their belief that even having guns promotes violence. They don't want a socialist state, but their attitude is just convenient to promote that agenda. It's just like the revolutions in Iran, in the West Bank, and even Cuba. The revolutionaries promoted themselves as pro-democracy agents of change. When they got in power, everything changed. Anti-gun sentiment is being used and manipulated to further an agenda.

Originally posted by Unidentified_Objective
This thread is right-wing porn at its finest. I'm sure those panicking also masturbate daily to Glen Beck's lunatic and unproven rantings.

You should clarify to the inept and susceptible that this is research data meant to weigh the outcome of all possible scenarios. This is NOT policy nor are they giving any recommendations.

Its important to note that whenever ANY kind of research is done & the scientific process is applied, all possibilities must be applied and weighed. Otherwise, it is not accurate data. Not sure the OP has grasped the concept.

It would be easier to believe your lies about this just being an amusing daydream written down in memo form if we didn't have our own Attorney General (you know, head of the DOJ) on record as supporting brainwashing people to be anti -gun, and also saying that a total ban would be a good thing, on different occasions.

This memo is a smoking gun and no amount of bellyaching, well-poisoning, and water muddying will change this. I bet it will sell another 3 million guns!

The anti-gun agenda is finished.

reply to post by schuyler


Well, also consider that due to extensive and pervasive, successful media brainwashing that the percentage of useful idiots is at an all time high. The time is ripe for the world revolution, but as long as there is an armed populace in the USA it can not occur.

National gun confiscation to reduce 35 murders a year? Because.. if 5+ people die at the hands of one person.. it's a lot worse than hundreds or thousands of people spread out throughout the year?

ETA, I'm glad to hear this is just research and not an actual proposal. It is nice to hear them admit that "Assault Weapons" only cause a small portion of murders, even though they understated how small of a portion that is.

Originally posted by nomnom

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
So it is ok if they try this 20, 50 or 100 years from now?

You can't undo a technology without collapsing civilization first.

Does the government ask the taxpayers what weapons police and the military should have or is the republic we live in such loosey&goosey that government decides for itself EVERYTHING?

In the meantime, further technologies will make the average gun effectively obsolete. So the point of such a question is moot. The fact remains that trying to violently revolt by use of guns from the people, is just as idiotic as trying to remove all guns by the authorities. It just leads to needless chaos, and bloodshed.

Guns can never become obsolete. Sure some folks who posses superior firepower will have the upper-hand but any weapon is better than no weapon. There are many factors to consider in armed conflict and strategy is usually paramount. It is not so much the weapon you have it is when and how you use it.

I think the economy is planned to collapse much sooner than that and that is why we have more and more school shootings. The ptb have made gun bannings in america a priority.

Pretty sure it's mostly a game of damage control out there. We're past the point of trying to be proactive, and solving future problems today. Now it's people flipping out, and making bizarre moves. Some of that manifests as hardcore shenanigans, while others are simply making foolish, desperate moves to try and keep the ship afloat. I don't doubt that some ptb want gun bannings in the US, but after gauging the public's reaction, they're having to back off. Despite what many people on this site believe, they're not complete idiots.

The government making too many bad decisions has its consequences and they are not pleasant. Still all is not lost but I don't see any serious corrective actions taking foothold so its probably damage control in minimal form.

The police is starting to resemble the military with apc, mini-drones by the hundreds, hoarding ammo, etc.

Very true. This is part of the damage control I'm speaking about. Everyone with a handle on how messy the system is, fears losing control, and is making desperate decisions to try and ensure anarchy doesn't ensue. Sucks. Everyone believes they're in the right, no matter which angle they view it from, or side they hold allegiance to.

Anarchy is not so bad. Sometimes you need a complete reboot to fix problems. I am not saying that is what we need yet, I am simply saying it is what it is. New leaders and new political systems will have a chance to form that are not wall street affiliated.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by nomnom

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
So it is ok if they try this 20, 50 or 100 years from now?

You can't undo a technology without collapsing civilization first.

Does the government ask the taxpayers what weapons police and the military should have or is the republic we live in such loosey&goosey that government decides for itself EVERYTHING?

In the meantime, further technologies will make the average gun effectively obsolete. So the point of such a question is moot. The fact remains that trying to violently revolt by use of guns from the people, is just as idiotic as trying to remove all guns by the authorities. It just leads to needless chaos, and bloodshed.

Guns can never become obsolete. Sure some folks who posses superior firepower will have the upper-hand but any weapon is better than no weapon. There are many factors to consider in armed conflict and strategy is usually paramount. It is not so much the weapon you have it is when and how you use it.

I think the economy is planned to collapse much sooner than that and that is why we have more and more school shootings. The ptb have made gun bannings in america a priority.

Pretty sure it's mostly a game of damage control out there. We're past the point of trying to be proactive, and solving future problems today. Now it's people flipping out, and making bizarre moves. Some of that manifests as hardcore shenanigans, while others are simply making foolish, desperate moves to try and keep the ship afloat. I don't doubt that some ptb want gun bannings in the US, but after gauging the public's reaction, they're having to back off. Despite what many people on this site believe, they're not complete idiots.

The government making too many bad decisions has its consequences and they are not pleasant. Still all is not lost but I don't see any serious corrective actions taking foothold so its probably damage control in minimal form.

The police is starting to resemble the military with apc, mini-drones by the hundreds, hoarding ammo, etc.

Very true. This is part of the damage control I'm speaking about. Everyone with a handle on how messy the system is, fears losing control, and is making desperate decisions to try and ensure anarchy doesn't ensue. Sucks. Everyone believes they're in the right, no matter which angle they view it from, or side they hold allegiance to.

Anarchy is not so bad. Sometimes you need a complete reboot to fix problems. I am not saying that is what we need yet, I am simply saying it is what it is. New leaders and new political systems will have a chance to form that are not wall street affiliated.

See, I think you underestimate the determined nature of the elite. They are not averse to risk. Sure, this latest media blitz that started with the Batman shooter and peaked during Sandy Hook has provoked the up-arming of the American public, but if anything this will cause a doubling of effort on the part of those who are determined to disarm the public. Expect more desperate measures in the future. After all, it worked a treat on 9/11 and that has made them very bold.

GUYS, ITS OK. let them take our guns. its for OUR SAFTEY DUH! dont you want to be safe?

reply to post by HattoriHanzou


I think people will eventually catch on to them. Its not like we live in the pre-internet era where you either watched tv or listened to the radio. Today people can research things for themselves and get real answers. I simply fear two things a)internet censorship which almost came to pass and b)lack of annonymity on message boards.

Look at spain hundreds of thousands showed up to protest. Greece the same. Look at the middle east rising against their 40 year dictators. Maybe some of the overthrows were american sponsored but it still does not change the fact we have change of leadership there.

I don't think they will double their efforts. In fact it would probably be stupid of them to do so. What I do expect is a short to medium pause and then more of the same. Make people forget a bit and then hit them hard.

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
This memo is a smoking gun and no amount of bellyaching, well-poisoning, and water muddying will change this.

Indeed - it conclusively proves that infowars is a source of lies and disinformation.

Any member of the Federal Government (appointed or elected: ie. AG Holder or Pr Obama) who would advocate confiscating "all guns" should be Impeached.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
This memo is a smoking gun and no amount of bellyaching, well-poisoning, and water muddying will change this.

Indeed - it conclusively proves that infowars is a source of lies and disinformation.

The DOJ has admitted the memo is real. By attempting to muddy the waters and poison the well you have shown your stripes. That's good for all of us.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
Any member of the Federal Government (appointed or elected: ie. AG Holder or Pr Obama) who would advocate confiscating "all guns" should be Impeached.

They're just trying to ban assault weapons, and leaving the language and definition of such weapons deliberately vague so they can gradually expand that definition until it includes everything down to Red Riders and slingshots.

Originally posted by nomnom
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.

But the indoctrination has already begun. We need to fight & argue against it now, because the future will be to late. It's already making a huge impact (the way I view in my readings). I read much more than I write, and I can see others making their view known and understood. The wave is changing albeit slowly.. so pro-gun folks have no choice but to stand their ground firmly & remain vigilant.

Originally posted by RobinB022

Originally posted by nomnom
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.

But the indoctrination has already begun. We need to fight & argue against it now, because the future will be to late. It's already making a huge impact (the way I view in my readings). I read much more than I write, and I can see others making their view known and understood. The wave is changing albeit slowly.. so pro-gun folks have no choice but to stand their ground firmly & remain vigilant.

I am wary of people who pop up on conspiracy sites and tell people that everything's fine and there's nothing to worry about. Especially when their entire posting history is composed of such messages. Look into the history of the person you are responding to. It's clear that, now that this memo is out, damage control is the priority.

Originally posted by RobinB022
But the indoctrination has already begun. We need to fight & argue against it now, because the future will be to late. It's already making a huge impact (the way I view in my readings). I read much more than I write, and I can see others making their view known and understood. The wave is changing albeit slowly.. so pro-gun folks have no choice but to stand their ground firmly & remain vigilant.

I trust people here are intelligent enough to realize what I'm saying here has nothing to do with not standing your ground. I specifically state that some PTB are gauging how far they can take things from the public's response to issues like gun control. As in, please do speak your mind, but also realize that the war is for your mind, and not for your guns anytime soon. It's simply not feasible.

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou

I am wary of people who pop up on conspiracy sites and tell people that everything's fine and there's nothing to worry about. Especially when their entire posting history is composed of such messages. Look into the history of the person you are responding to. It's clear that, now that this memo is out, damage control is the priority.

Then you have nothing to fear of me. I'm not saying anything of the sort. Please, I trust people will look at my post history. It clearly shows you're out of your mind.

reply to post by HattoriHanzou

First it is "assault weapons" (with the scary black accessories); then it will be the base semi-automatics as they are "just as dangerous as the weapons that were banned because of their cosmetic features"'; then it will be handguns because of their concealability and actual use in crime (unlike "assault rifles"); then it will be high powered hunting rifles (ie bolt action) because they are favored by snipers for their accuracy and range; and finally it will be shotguns because they can shoot the equivilane of a whole "clip" (30 rd mag) of .30 calibre buckshot in one shot! OMG.

reply to post by Sek82


YES! Two words, drum roll..."political terrorism"!!! Thank you for seeing the truth. Here's another bit of info I've read that also rings true: "Never let a crisis go to waste." I'll paraphrase a bit here: If there is a need to further a goal, and a crisis is needed but unavailable as a catalyst; create one. My terms are simplistic in form, but not in usage.