They are not coming for your guns.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
No matter what the flavor of the week is around here.

No matter how many tragedies take place.

No matter however many paranoid conspiracy nuts get together.

They are not going to take your guns.

The shelves are empty. The guns and ammo are sold out, everywhere people.

People around here sit and talk about hunting.

Please get out of your cubicle, 1 bedroom highrise apartment, take off the suit, put down the fruit drink, and go explore your country known as america.

New york is a small place, redneck town is alot bigger people.

The feds couldnt do anything with 500,000,000 weapons anyways.

Yeah the government is big and bad. Greg at the end of the street and billy joe bob could care less about written laws.

To the authorities, good freaken luck.


edit on 18-3-2013 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   
I heard people say exactly what you're saying and at the time, I looked around at a state full of guns and believed them. SPAS 12's were available right down the street at the sporting goods store next to Colt AR-15 rifles and Uzi semi-automatic weapons. All kinds of fun stuff and something for everyone. Who, I asked myself, could ever come for the guns? Can't happen.....too many gun owners and too much to overcome to even start.

That was California in 1992. You see what California is for gun laws today.

They aren't coming for *ALL* of them...as in, to the last .22 rifle in a closet. They intend to leave us some ...just nothing worth it's name for more than squirrel and deer hunting. Just as has been done in California. After all, one of the people directly involved in crafting those laws is now the self appointed leader of the charge for national policy. Diane Feinstein. To think they don't WANT to take our guns..and won't TRY to the extent the laws and courts allow them...is simply ignoring what these same people have already done when given the chance to act without enough resistance.
edit on 18-3-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


All america really has left is arms sales domestic and abroad be it selling secrets with North Korea . The thought of even tweaking guns laws has sent a frenzy of sales at local gun shops , I really don't think TPTB really give a crap if we all shoot and kill each other , all they give a crap about is the GDP and I am sure there are some record sales going on after the mention of gun control .



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   

They intend to leave us some ...just nothing worth it's name for more than squirrel and deer hunting.


Exactly...and those empty shelves and ammo cases aren't doing much to dissuade that theory.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
that would be the bottom line - but - they will limit then tell you to register - then confiscate - gubberment creep.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


My battery is dead on my phone. I have to go to the car and get the charger.

My son just got out of surgery a bit ago.

I will respond in a bit.
edit on 18-3-2013 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


Senator Diane Feinstein isn't?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein released a list of 157 rifles, handguns and shotguns that will be banned if her legislation passes Congress.

Feinstein's list of 157 banned guns

And neither is Senator Chuck Schumer, I'm guessing?

Though Schumer said he supports the Second Amendment and is opposed to gun confiscation, in 2007 he voted against the Vitter Amendment to SA 2774, which would have protected American citizens from gun confiscation in the event of a national emergency.

Another senator warns of gun confiscation

And, I suppose, this was completely a figment of imagination?

Rep. Jan Schakowsky: Assault Weapons ban 'Just the Beginning'


Is this also a work of fiction?


Missouri Democrats introduced an anti-gun bill which would turn law-abiding firearm owners into criminals. They will have 90 days to turn in their guns if the legislation is passed.


Missouri Democrats Introduce Legislation to Confiscate Firearms - Gives Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Weapons

So no one is coming after our guns, except of course, the Democrats who actively are. They are relentless and untiring on that goal.

They are also aware that banning guns because they look scary, or "Military Style Assault Weapons" is ridiculous. Its because they know if they can ban a gun simply because of its appearance, then they can ban a gun for any reason at all.

I find it curious how no one seeks to disarm criminals in any other way than by disarming law abiding citizens first, in the hopes of a 'trickle-down' effect that will eventually reach criminals and the mentally ill. This is of course, patent fantasy and only makes a criminals work environment safe by disarming victims.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 




The feds couldnt do anything with 500,000,000 weapons anyways.

Really?
Local governments find guns interesting enough to pay $50.00 or more for them, even obsolete, nonfunctional firearms.

There was a time when people couldn't own gold coins in the US. They aren't even dangerous... unless of course you count the threat that they present to a fiat money scheme.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Hitler tried to bring in the NWO too fast. He rushed it and did it with extreme force and the strategy backfired.

They have learned from his failed attempt. Now they use the boiling frog technique, because time doesn't matter to them. A little bit here, a little bit there.... a Patriot Act here, some NDAA there.... checkpoints here, VIPR teams there..... a ban on this, propaganda over there.... instill some fear of your neighbor, and hey, while you're at it, if you see something you think is "not normal", go ahead and snitch on the guy next to you too. Remember, the drones are watching and we can monitor you any time we like.

They're not trying to take your 2nd Amendment away, they're just going to tell you what you can and cannot own. Then you can expect the list of government approved items to get shorter and shorter. Register, fingerprint, take an anger management course, get a permission slip from the shrink, keep them under lock & key at an approved facility, and finally turn them in "or else".

We are already living in a police state. Just because it's not dressed in a swastika doesn't mean it's any less oppressive. Everyone is a criminal and / or a terrorist, and if you step out of line for one second, the hammer is coming down upon you.

Well, the hammer is coming down anyway regardless.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Well, if you asked the people of Cyprus a few weeks ago if their money was safe in the bank, they would have said yes.

All it takes is a contrived "disaster", and even Billy Bob could find himself forced to turn over his weapons.

Never say never.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
They dont have to take our guns, they can just buy up all the ammo, like theyre doing now. Without ammo, a gun is just a paperweight.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


They are stopping the flow of Guns and more ammo. When you cant go buy 22 rounds then yes they are buying up rounds just to keep them out of our hands. With the new DHS and their 2700 MRAPS, Mine Resistant Armor personnel carriers for those who don't know. The billions of Hollow Point rounds, the massive increase in surveillance they are going to slowly take whats left or at least they will try.

The trick for when they start this is to target any and all communications. If you see any Vans that have any antennas on them like the news vans they they are watching you or the area. Any bunker or base will have Sat dishes and antennas that will need to be disabled. If they cant talk to their Drones and DHS flunkies then they will fall. Command and Communication trucks and Trailers are being built for DHS and every agency at record paces so you bet they are up to something. Don't ask me how I know this.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


Basically it is done as in the UK amending after enacting laws, the amendments just keep coming.

Look at the gun laws per country interesting. Also there is no correlation between number of guns, strict laws to gun shot deaths.


Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the enactment of the 1920, 1937, 1968, 1988(Amendment), and 1997 (Amendment) Firearms Acts and [69] leading to the outright ban on the ownership of all automatic, and most self-loading, firearms in the UK.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I agree with what you are saying.

So tell me. How is the gun violence out in cali after all of the legislation?

There are a few states that will try, but it will fail on a national level.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibajaba
that would be the bottom line - but - they will limit then tell you to register - then confiscate - gubberment creep.


You might think so.

But they do not have the manpower, resources, or locations to put said firearms.

Remember, some people dont need to buy. They make.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWrightWing
 


Pleeeeease,,,,

Do you live missouri? I am in st louis now.

Get out of the city and ask around about 90 days to turn in guns.

Tell me, how far did that bill make it. Other than in the headlines.

Nobody would get on board because it would be a political suicide.

I can also dig up info on deadly unicorns. Does that make them a threat?

Dont drink too much of the anti gun koolaid.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by liejunkie01
 




The feds couldnt do anything with 500,000,000 weapons anyways.

Really?
Local governments find guns interesting enough to pay $50.00 or more for them, even obsolete, nonfunctional firearms.

There was a time when people couldn't own gold coins in the US. They aren't even dangerous... unless of course you count the threat that they present to a fiat money scheme.



Now take 50.00 times 500,000,000.

Gun buybacks are for crackheads that need a fix.

Gold doesnt even compare to guns.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Well, if you asked the people of Cyprus a few weeks ago if their money was safe in the bank, they would have said yes.

All it takes is a contrived "disaster", and even Billy Bob could find himself forced to turn over his weapons.

Never say never.



Well them people are fools for believing the banker system is there to protect them.

I do not have a bank account. Do you. Do you feel safe with your money in there.

The gun craze is happening.

Billy bob has cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and all sorts of family and friends tjat are not scared of the law such as yourself.

It will be a bad deal if they try to ban guns friend.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


I have to say man,that we do things a little different here in the states.

People are already getting irritable about the rights.

There are way too many people and guns.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 




Gold doesnt even compare to guns.

CORRECT.

As I stated in my post, gold isn't really a threat to a government agent.
A firearm in the hands of a citizen is a threat to them.





 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join