This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: CFR Globalists Say Don’t Worry - “Your Guns Are In Safe Hands”

Tyler Durden's picture





 

From Brandon Smith of Alt-Market

CFR Globalists Say Don’t Worry - “Your Guns Are In Safe Hands”

It’s funny, I was worried about my Second Amendment rights just a moment ago, but now that the Council On Foreign Relations, a global governance think tank and inbred cesspool of despotic elitism, has explained the situation to me, I suddenly feel at ease…

In preparation for the fast approaching UN summit on “international conventional arms trade” in New York, the CFR has published yet another disinformation piece skewing the facts and twisting reality to lull Americans into a state of apathy:

http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/07/20/your-guns-are-in-safe-hands/

Am I surprised that the CFR would rehash the talking points of the UN and declare uninhibited support for their worldwide gun grabbing bid?  Of course not.  The CFR and the UN are part and parcel of the same nefarious sea monster; each tentacle does its duty to rend sovereign ships asunder.  However, such propaganda articles from establishment organizations do give us an opportunity to dissect and annihilate a host of lies and misdirections in one fell swoop.  There may not be much sport in pulling apart the CFR’s poorly composed arguments, but, it has to be done…

CFR writers Stewart Patrick and Emma Welch begin with a kind of red herring distraction, immediately bringing up the internal conflicts in Syria as some kind of rationale for the UN putting its nose into the gun buying habits of sovereign countries.  I would like to point out that most of the “illegally procured” firearms being shipped into Syria are coming from the U.S. to supply an insurgency which is now looking more and more like a bought and paid for destabilizing false flag army rather than a true and honest revolution for freedom:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syrian-rebels-get-influx-of-arms-with-gulf-neighbors-money-us-coordination/2012/05/15/gIQAds2TSU_story.html

I am highly doubtful that the UN has any intention of stopping this activity on the part of the U.S., primarily because they have never declared opposition to the covert support of Syrian rebels.  On top of this, the guidelines of the UN Small Arms Treaty are so broad that they could be interpreted any number of ways to fit any number of desired outcomes.  If the UN wanted to label the supply of U.S. arms to Syrian insurgents “legal” within the bounds of the treaty, they could.  The injection of Syria into the treaty issue by the CFR is an obvious ploy designed to make you falsely associate the UN action as being useful in combating Syrian destabilization, even though this is in no way the UN’s goal.

Ironically, after slipping the Syrian crisis into the discussion to manipulate readers, without mentioning the U.S. government’s involvement in the clandestine supply of arms to the opposition movement, the CFR then attacks Iran’s involvement in the treaty as hypocritical, because of their alleged funneling of arms to the Assad regime.  So, within the first two paragraphs of their article, the Council on Foreign Relations has dishonestly tied Syria to the gun treaty debate with cherry-picked data and criticized Iran for supposed crimes of which the U.S. is also guilty.  This kind of disinformation truly boggles the mind…

The article continues by outlining the “horrors” of the small arms trade, which it immediately associates with terrorism, rogue states (of which they apparently include Iran, but not the U.S.), and criminal syndicates.  When, in fact, most of the arms deals taking place in shadow markets around the world are consistently discovered to be facilitated by governments themselves (as the Syria crisis clearly illustrates as well as the Fast and Furious scandal).  I still have not seen any indication from the UN that this is a problem for them as long as participating governments play the globalist game.  You can read the text of the Small Arms Treaty here:

http://iapcar.org/?p=970

The only thing the UN treaty accomplishes is a double standard in favor of establishment entities to which the rules do not apply.  A destabilized Syria serves globalist interests, and so, the insurgency WILL get U.S. arms, and the United Nations WILL look the other way, treaty or no treaty.

The CFR goes on to claim that:

“…participating countries generally agree that a treaty is desperately needed and long overdue…”

This is to paint a false image of consensus in the minds of readers.  It is as if we are supposed to say “well, if everyone is for it, then I am too…”

Only a few lines later, the article contradicts itself by lamenting:

“…despite three years of preparations and nearly a decade of advocacy campaigns, there remains a lack of consensus on the scope, criteria, and implementation of the treaty. The usual suspects, Russia, China, and—to a certain extent—the United States, are among the most influential of a handful of countries raising objections, particularly over the proposed inclusion of small arms and ammunition, human rights criteria, and regulatory measures. And to compound matters, the United States continues to face domestic opposition to its participation in the treaty negotiations…”

So, we finally get to the heart of that which chaps the CFR’s behind, and the primary reason the article was written:  Domestic opposition to U.S. participation in the UN treaty.

Government opposition to the treaty is not what worries the UN.  Barack Obama will sign the accord in a heartbeat and salivate while doing it.  What does concern the globalists is the fact that so many Americans, millions of them, are largely against the proposition.  This fact, in itself, is very revealing of their true intentions.

Why is it that, though the UN has clear support from our President and our Secretary of State, they are so adamant about public support and acceptance?  Senate ratification may become a stumbling bloc, but their arguments do not address the senate; they address us as citizens.  Why is the CFR so concerned with convincing us that the treaty is “harmless”?  If the treaty is going to be signed regardless of what we feel, and if it is truly not a threat to our rights, then why not simply pass the resolution, and show us through action that our right to own firearms is not under threat?  Why are the UN and the CFR so interested in manufacturing our consent?

The reality is, laws and treaties, domestic and international, are mostly implemented to achieve psychological acceptance from the populace.  If a law or set of principles is written down and praised by the bureaucratic circus, but the people do not embrace the action, then the lawmakers have ultimately accomplished nothing.  They are not satisfied with codification.  They want cultural identification.  They want people to love the new law.

I have found in my time tracking and analyzing corrupt law, the harder the shills work to convince you that a particular regulation is innocuous, the more dangerous it ends up becoming.

The CFR continues by giving a deliberately weak sided opposing view to the treaty by quoting arguments from the NRA and Mitt Romney, of all people.  The NRA has many times in the past actually contributed to the support of laws in the U.S. which are undermining to the 2nd Amendment and has long been considered by knowledgeable gun right advocates to be controlled opposition.  Mitt Romney’s (flip-flopper extraordinaire) record on gun control is no better than Obama’s:

http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-gun-conrol-nra-assault-weapons-colorado-shooting-theater-2012-7

The CFR would of course never quote true and intelligent proponents of gun rights, like Gun Owners of America, for instance.  Otherwise, their string of logical fallacies would be completely disrupted. 

That said, the threat to American sovereignty and Constitutional protections is indeed on the minds of many in this country.  The CFR labels these concerns “inflammatory” and “unfounded”.  They list the stock responses and talking points which have no doubt been composed and passed around by the UN.  I have listed them below, along with the reasons why they are disingenuous:

1)  The treaty is limited to the international trade of conventional arms, which pertains to the buying, selling, transshipping, transferring, or loaning across borders.

Don’t worry America, the UN treaty only covers the importation and exportation of firearms, says the CFR.  I would like to remind you, though, of similar situations that have been exploited by the Federal Government here in the U.S. in the name of the Commerce Clause.  The original intent of the Commerce Clause was to allow the Federal Government some oversight over the FOREIGN and INTERSTATE trade of goods.  Sovereign states were meant to retain governance over all internal commerce.

Unfortunately over time, especially since FDR’s presidency and the New Deal, the government has used and abused the commerce clause, subjugating the rights of states and claiming authority over ALL trade, not just external trade.  Even when a state takes a stand on a particular form of commerce, as Montana has with firearms or medical marijuana, the Federal Government has ignored local law and unleashed alphabet agencies like the FBI, ATF, and FDA to crush dissenters.  I have no doubt that the UN will eventually abuse the Small Arms Treaty just as our Federal Government has abused the Commerce Clause.

2)  The draft text of the treaty explicitly recognizes “the exclusive right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through the constitutional protections on private ownership.

As stated above, there are no guarantees on this.  Also, there has been a consistent push by globalist academia to assert that treaties somehow “supersede” Constitutional protections.  This argument comes primarily from a misguided interpretation of the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution by men like Chief Justice John Marshal, who said in 1829:

“A treaty is, in its nature, a contract between two nations, not a legislative act. It does not generally effect, of itself, the object to be accomplished; especially, so far as its operation is intraterritorial; but is carried into execution by the sovereign power of the respective parties to the instrument…In the United States, a different principle is established. Our constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature…”

Marshal was a very confused and foolish interpreter of the Constitution, at least in this instance.  In regards to treaties and the Supremacy Clause in general the Constitution clearly states:

“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.”

Meaning, all laws and treaties are subject to the guidelines of Constitutional rights and the laws of the states first and foremost.  If a law or treaty violates those rights, it is null and void.  Period.  Sadly, this fact has not stopped the use of treaties by certain government officials and think tanks as an argument for an end run around the Constitution.

3)  In response to the charges that the treaty would co-opt U.S. national sovereignty, arms control experts argue that the treaty would have “little to no impact” on existing regulatory processes…

By signing this treaty, the U.S. would indeed lose sovereignty.  The CFR acts as if the UN is simply handing out a short list of guidelines and giving regulatory control to nation states.  It would seem they have not read the fine print.

Article 13 of the UN treaty establishes what they call the “Implementation Support Unit”.  This group collects data from member countries, oversees the enforcement of treaty provisions, asserts final authority over the interpretation of said provisions, collects financial obligations from member countries, and centralizes the entire process under one roof.  The ISU will be a UN agency that administrates over the U.S. and other countries when it comes to the trade of small arms.  For the CFR to claim that the U.S. will not lose sovereignty is a flagrant falsehood.

4)  In an attempt to diminish concerns that the UN will overstep its bounds when it comes to U.S. sovereignty, the CFR states:  “The United States already has in place a rigorous export control system, defined as the “gold standard.” Instead, the treaty is primarily aimed at countries in which rigorous controls and oversight are absent, in an attempt to harmonize and coordinate standards worldwide…”

My question is, if the United States ALREADY has a rigorous export control system, then why is it necessary for us to join the UN gun treaty at all??? 
The CFR moves forward by stating that the U.S. must use its position to “set an example”, but it would appear that we already have set that example according to the CFR’s own words.  What purpose then does a UN treaty on guns serve?  Why do we need the UN to mediate anything?  Does anyone have a logical explanation for this?  I would enjoy hearing it.

I believe that the UN Small Arms Treaty is another step, perhaps an important step, in the imposition of a subversive philosophy: that gun ownership is an affront to the “globally conscious”.  That it is a barbaric relic of a bygone era, and that it is no longer practical in our modern times.  The mass shooting in Colorado this past week has been used as a rallying point for the anti-gun fervor, but what that event really showed us is what the world would be like if law abiding citizens were totally disarmed (as they were in Aurora by anti-carry laws within the city).  Criminals will always be able to get weapons, and they will almost always choose targets that are unarmed and low risk.  If Americans lose their right to bear arms, I can promise that we will see massacres like the Aurora Theater attack on a regular basis.

As far as national sovereignty is concerned, the CFR is completely unqualified to comment.  CFR members have in the past openly admitted the true purpose of their organization, which is to eliminate national sovereignty and institute global governance:

"The sovereignty fetish is still so strong in the public mind,
that there would appear to be little chance of winning popular assent to
American membership in anything approaching a super-state organization.
Much will depend on the kind of approach which is used in further
popular education."

CFR "American Public Opinion and Postwar Security Commitments", 1944

"The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England ... [and] ... believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established…I know of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years in the early 1960s to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known." Dr. Carroll Quigley, CFR Member, Mentor to Bill Clinton, from Tragedy and Hope

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." Strobe Talbott, CFR Member

In light of this information, I find the Council On Foreign Relations’ attempts to reassure us on the safety of our sovereignty rather hilarious.  Their blind stab at defending the UN’s gun treaty tells me all I need to know.  Where there is smoke, there is fire, and no quarter should be given to these people.  None.  Their intentions are not honorable, and they often seek to deceive to get what they want.  Our safest bet is to stand in the way of any action they choose to support.  If it’s good for them, it will invariably be bad for us.

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:48 | Link to Comment Ray1968
Ray1968's picture

Oops... I seem to have "lost" all my firearms while boating.... along with all my gold bars. So sorry.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:00 | Link to Comment Decay is Constant
Decay is Constant's picture

Yours too?  Wow, what a coincidence.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:08 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Never let a tragedy go to waste:

 

"Lone-wolf terrorists are extremely intelligent and often come from very good socio-economic backgrounds," said Todd McGhee, a former Massachusetts state trooper who is now managing partner of Protecting the Homeland Innovations, a security training firm in Braintree, Mass.

"But they become despondent. They become isolated from family members. Then they grab on to an ideology. Some people find religion. Some people find anti-government," he said.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-07-20/colorado-shooting-h...

 

Sounds kind of like Obama's "they cling to God and guns" speech, doesn't it?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:42 | Link to Comment Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

To learn more about the CFR find and read a first edition of historian Carroll Quigley's "Tradgedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time".

Quigley had unprecedented access to the records of the CFR and wrote a stunner.  He lays out exactly what the elites have been up to.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:35 | Link to Comment engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

I think that a "Global Ban on Bankers" would make more sense

 "If the criminals ban guns, then only the criminals will have freedom and wealth"

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 21:14 | Link to Comment FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

“Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience.” ~ John Locke

Molon Labe

III

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:42 | Link to Comment Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

Coming For Your Guns-the latest video from the great Brother Nathaniel:

http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=740

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:20 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Wow, what a screeching idiot that guy is, as is anyone dumb enough to listen to him. Obama taking your guns was used in the last election, and it'll be used again, to create emotional outrage and get you to go vote for people who keep robbing you blind.

Not only didn't you lose your guns, but gun sales went nuts, like they will again before people realize that members of Congress do want to get re-elected and will never go along! The NRA and gun dealers are laughing all the way to their daily Brinks drop offs.

It's just like how they keep using abortion, gay this and gay that, and Islamofascism, whatever the hell that means, the get you into a blind rage and show up to vote for people that have nothing real to offer you once elected.

And you fall for it every time.

Maybe it's time someone did take your guns away. Aside from being too stupid to own lethal objects, there are simply too many innocent people dying at the hands of morons and unstable assholes.

In Japan, guns are outlawed, and about 10 people a year get shot. Here, the hysteria is causing more to buy guns, and before too long, we'll settle our petty disagreements with them. Here, about 500 dumb ass gun owners shoot themsleves accidentally!

Road rage? No problem. get out, pace it off, and start shooting. I think evloution works in reverse sometimes, like here, with you!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:53 | Link to Comment j8h9
j8h9's picture

Yes, agreed. And when the nato treaty thing is over and no one loses their guns, the entire discussion will disappear and they'll never consider that the hype and frenzy was all propaganda to get them worked up and emotional so they vote for that party in November...  Whether you like him or not, Obama is not an idiot, he knows he would lose enormous support from rural Democrats if he proposed gun control and/or restrictions.

I do not support gun control.  Since 2007-2008 debacle and the real possibility of financial collapse, however, the US military could easily disarm 90% of the country with the remaining 10% resisting and dying as a result. The US Marines just graduated their first Civilian Police battalian. Good luck fighting them. 

Insofar as some of the other posts, it tragic to see people call Police 'welfare queens'. Clearly the result of weak minds absorbing rightwing propaganda. Do you all believe Police and Fireman are welfare queens? Agree with one poster to keep ZeroHedge focused on markets and not on rightwing taling points that bring in trolls and dittoheads with high school educations... 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:58 | Link to Comment Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

Bob and j8, cancel that cable and throw out the TV-the 2nd Amendment was put there to give the people a chance against a tyrannical government-all those people buying guns know this and you don't. Last week 12 people died, if they take the guns from the population it will be 12 million next week and 120 million after that. The same gang that took over Russia 90 years ago has taken over America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_terror#Atrocities

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:32 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Now, you are a prime example of someone who shouldn't own lethal objects. Given your stupidity, it's amazing you haven't accidentally killed yourself a dozen times over, with or without a gun.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:39 | Link to Comment Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

Why do you think I'm stupid?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:47 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

For one, do you really think you can shoot it out with the government and win? Second, under what scenario do you envision them gunning down millions of us? Who made the government our main enemy, and your biggest mortal threat? 

That's why I think you're stupid.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:12 | Link to Comment piceridu
piceridu's picture

It's not the military anyone should fear it's the police: federal, state and local. The military is actually our saving grace because many have seen and smelled with their eyes and nose what misery, dispair and death feels like at the hands of governments gone wild. Many signed up because they believed they were going to "protect and serve" their country. But their senses were filled with lies, deceit, death and destruction and the flag waving propaganda from crony military recruiters wore off. They and their brothers and sisters know and have seen the truth from Fallujah to the shores of Tripoli. They know there is no honor in fighting these corporate wars but they will return home with the a newfound realization that the real war will be fought against the powererful money centers right outside their front doors.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:28 | Link to Comment engineertheeconomy
engineertheeconomy's picture

Imperative to know that the exact opposite of a "Global Gun Ban" is:

GLOBAL FREEDOM

GLOBAL LIBERTY

GLOBAL RIGHTS

GLOBAL WEALTH FOR THE PEOPLE

to hand over your weapon is to accept slavery and poverty

If you can put a piece of metal in a vice and drill a hole in it, you can make your own damn gun. Now might be a really good time to learn how to do that

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:01 | Link to Comment ChacoFunFact
ChacoFunFact's picture

here is an app to discretely record the police with your cell phone when they pull you over....

http://www.springwise.com/government/aclu-app-discreetly-videotapes-interactions-police/

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:50 | Link to Comment 12ToothAssassin
12ToothAssassin's picture

Im torn over this app - on one hand it seems awesome but on the other, doesnt this allow goog and aapl to hand over a short list of freedom activists? Torn.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:17 | Link to Comment Raymond K Hessel
Raymond K Hessel's picture

The Second Amendment didn't make our government the enemy.

The Second Amendment laid out an insurance policy to defend ourselves in case our government goes too far.  There's a scene in Panther where the cops are attacking a couple of guys in an alley.  The Black Panthers come out with rifles and observe.  Within seconds the cops stop beating those guys.  Within minutes, the cops leave.  Not one shot was fired.  That show of force was enough to stop the government.

For me, that was the perfect example of the purpose to the Second Amendment.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:26 | Link to Comment V in PA
V in PA's picture

Police misconduct is as pervasive in the US as it is in England, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, France, Russia, and South Africa (Champion, 2001). Despite efforts to combat it, police misconduct is incessant and there is no systematic approach to solve the problem. Allegations of police misconduct, brutality, and harassment have popped up all over the US. The problem is not only nationwide, but it...

Good Thesis on Police Misconduct. Read the rest at: 

http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc3234/m2/1/high_res_d/thesis.pdf

 

The Government made the Government our main enemy. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:51 | Link to Comment 12ToothAssassin
Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:39 | Link to Comment Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

If Solzhenitsyn thought the murder of tens of millions of Russians by the Bolsheviks could have been stopped with axes and hammers then that's good enough for me.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulag_Archipelago

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:39 | Link to Comment Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

"What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?"

 

Interesting point. A study done on robbers in prison indicated that if their chance of getting killed while committing a robbery reached 1 in 100, they would look for a new line of work.

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:57 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

Well said. Spoken like a true state-worshiping, gestapo-boot-licking turd.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:04 | Link to Comment Au Shucks
Au Shucks's picture

Bobnoxious and Bobtarded.... that is the only way I can describe your ranting idiocy

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:31 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

If you had any education, you would have a larger vocabulary and could have taken a respectable shot at it. I guess you went with all you had there, huh?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:13 | Link to Comment Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

"...Some people find anti-government."

And so the setup begins. If you are against the government, you are a "lone-wolf terrorist".

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:23 | Link to Comment Raymond K Hessel
Raymond K Hessel's picture

It's worse than that.

Now that rebellion is classified as a mental illness, oppositional defiant disorder, authorities can diagnose anti-establishment types as mentally ill which allows them to legally confiscate a person's weapons.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:15 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

Statists--they always think their way is the only way and that everyone who opposes them is a terrorist.  Anti-government is not an ideology, it is the response to overbearing statism.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:08 | Link to Comment Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Mine are right... here.....oh my god....someone stole them.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:01 | Link to Comment Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

As soon as the US Government , including the US Army, bodyguards, and all law enforcment get gid of thier guns I will get rid of mine.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:15 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

Not even then for me--cold, dead, hands. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:16 | Link to Comment ATM
ATM's picture

I never had mine to begin with.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:32 | Link to Comment f16hoser
f16hoser's picture

I lost my guns and PM's because I have a gambling problem.....

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:53 | Link to Comment 12ToothAssassin
12ToothAssassin's picture

We should co-sponsor each other for a good 12 step program. I have the same problem!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:02 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Due to the recent economic down turn, I had to sell all of mine (gold and guns) to make ends meet.  I sold at a loss I might add.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:16 | Link to Comment ATM
ATM's picture

Your papers, please.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:05 | Link to Comment Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

You could say you sold them all to Eric Holder for cash , just print a recipt for them and then its up to the LEO to get in touch with him , tell him to be sure to mention F and F.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:07 | Link to Comment knowless
knowless's picture

SOO SSAaWLREEE!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:48 | Link to Comment Hype Alert
Hype Alert's picture

You didn't own that!  Somebody else owned that.  You didn't own it by yourself.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:30 | Link to Comment Killer the Buzzard
Killer the Buzzard's picture

"So sorry Mr. Federal Agent, I was robbed last night... see, here is the police report.  I'm afraid someone else robbed me before you attempted to do the same."

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:48 | Link to Comment zero19451945
zero19451945's picture

The UN-->Yet another organization with a long track record of failure.

Maybe Bernanke will go work for them next.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:56 | Link to Comment Grinder74
Grinder74's picture

You know The Won certainly will.  Being president is so beneath his potential greatness. 

</barf>

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:07 | Link to Comment ChacoFunFact
ChacoFunFact's picture

The UN, 67 years, 142+ conflicts. 

The Fed, 100 years, 95% devaluation.

How'd we get so lucky to come by these two?  What is in common with their origin(s)?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:50 | Link to Comment Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

They were established by people who wish to be free to make everyone else slaves.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:48 | Link to Comment GMadScientist
Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:25 | Link to Comment Urban Roman
Urban Roman's picture

 <-- Fast
 <-- Furious

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:30 | Link to Comment GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Shell.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:49 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Seriously...

Come and get them.

The 3% is waiting.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:50 | Link to Comment marz929
marz929's picture

WHERE IS JON CORZINE?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:51 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

I'm a believer in the 2nd Amendment, but get over it. We have other rights that are in MUCH more danger than the 2nd Amendment.

  Where is all this paranoia for the 4th Amendment? Or the 1st?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:54 | Link to Comment Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

How about the 14th Midtown. One that needs to be killed? It is the reason, prime, that we are in a Corporatized world today. Especially in the US of A.

ori

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:02 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Remember the origins of the UN Ori... Those who pushed through the 14th are the same folks who created the UN, after the League of Nation fell apart.

The UN is nothing more than criminal banksters trying to legitimize their desire for world dominance through a governing agency they created out of thin air, much like their paper money...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:06 | Link to Comment Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

True.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:31 | Link to Comment new game
new game's picture

elite appointing elitists; true question is where does their legitamacy come from?

Answer: Nowhere as there never was a vote cast.

UN created to do just what it is doing...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:40 | Link to Comment 1100-TACTICAL-12
1100-TACTICAL-12's picture

I for one love being ruled over by these limp wristed globalist dickheads.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:29 | Link to Comment LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

We should get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US

 

U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:48 | Link to Comment DCFusor
DCFusor's picture

The huge majority of UN members are small dictatorships who of course don't want their opposition armed quite so easily.  They are trying to drag the rest along...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:08 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

The 14th is a damn good right. The best one outside of the first 10.

the problem is that it was too vague (in a time of corporate corruption), and thus twisted to serve the will of the elite.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:54 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

I would like to know how many deaths the 16th amendment has caused...where is that stat??!??!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:12 | Link to Comment GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Are you counting the invaded too, or just American troops?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:15 | Link to Comment hannah
hannah's picture

screw the 16th...how many americans have been murdered because of the 13tth amendment?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:55 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Which 13th?  The real one that no one gets to see or the fraudulent one that replaced it?

http://www.constitutionalconcepts.org/13thamend-%20facts.htm

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:57 | Link to Comment cossack55
cossack55's picture

The few that have read them are too afraid to talk about it.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 15:42 | Link to Comment ChacoFunFact
ChacoFunFact's picture

Robert Nisbet on the Shock the Founding Fathers would feel if they could see the current size of the Military Establishment and the National Government (1988)

 

Read the full quote in context here.

In 1988 Nisbet gave a series of lectures to celebrate the bicentennial of the American Constitution. He reflected on what the Framers would be most struck by in America today and concluded that they would be incredulous at the staggering size of the military establishment and the Leviathan-like size of the national government:

What would the Framers (of the U.S. Constitution) be most struck by in America today? … Three aspects of the present age in America would surely draw their immediate, concerned, and perhaps incredulous attention. First, the prominence of war in American life since 1914, amounting to a virtual Seventy-Five Years War, and with this the staggering size of the American military establishment since World War II. … Second, the Leviathan-like presence of the national government in the affairs of states, towns, and cities, and in the lives, cradle to grave, of individuals.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:26 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

Where is all this paranoia for the 4th Amendment? Or the 1st?

 

If you have the NADS, the 2nd is the only way you keep any of them.

ALL political Power comes from the barrel of a Gun (quote by Obama's Uncle)

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:01 | Link to Comment CH1
CH1's picture

If you have the NADS, the 2nd is the only way you keep any of them.

Fair enough, but the 4th is trashed EVERY DAY, and no one is using their guns to do anything about it.

Lots of people talk big, but "the line" is always redefined forward.

Talk is cheap, action precious... and there are a hundred things to do that don't involve shooting. It's just that talking is easier, and talking big impresses people.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:05 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

The problem with relying on guns is that there is always someone with a bigger gun out there, and the government usually owns it.

As you said, there are all sorts of ways to protect your rights without shooting someone, but people don't do it (mostly because that involves actually having to talk to other people that you might not like).

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:21 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

The population is so dumbed down from the Government Schools that most don't even know what the 4th amendment is and that police are NOT allowed to randomly stop you, enter your home or vehicle and go through all your shit without either a warrant or your permission.

"No you cannot search my car, am I being detained?... No? Then am I free to leave officer?... No?... Am I being accused of a crime? No? I will be on my way then."

Unless you are directly accused of a crime, police contact should be consensual under the 4th.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:39 | Link to Comment Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

You get around that by indoctrinating the youth to see the intrusive government as the accepted norm.  Don't teach them civics, while making it seem normal through stuff like random school locker searches (hey, they're minors) and then license them to "drive" (License = A permit to do that which is otherwise illegal) and on the roads subject them to a myriad of abuses based on their age and fear of authority.

By the time they reach the full age of majority (21, since you don't assume all your corporate rights until then, but you get to assume all of the liabilities well before it) they are good tools conditioned to accept a "benevolent" master running their lives and assuring their "safety"...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:18 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

And as soon as you try to exert those rights at a traffic stop, let's say, the cop will use some pretext he knows of to continue with whatever it is he wants to do.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:57 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Which is why one should always carry a micro video recorder to record the stop.  Also FOIA will allow you to get the tapes from the cops perspective.

Municipalities will rein in their thug police when they are sued for civil rights violations.  It has happened quite a few times within the Open Carry community.  City has to pay out big $$ for rights violations the tax payers start getting pissed.

Did you notice the reports in the Anaheim shooting of the cops attempting to buy all the cell phone footage of them shooting an unarmed man in the back as he ran away?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:02 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

If guns are supposed to protect our other rights then they better start doing it because they are doing a pretty shitty job of it so far.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:21 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

I don't think you get it--the guns are the last option and it isn't to protect your rights so much as to try and preserve your life.  It's more about preventing government-sponsored mass murder, quite frankly.  Think Germany late 1930s, or Stalinist Russia after the war. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:27 | Link to Comment midtowng
midtowng's picture

OK. THAT I understand and agree with.

But that's not what was said above in other comments.

Nor, and here's the important point, does it help defend our freedom, which is what needs to be done right now.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:56 | Link to Comment Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Getting rid of government is defending our freedom.

Working within the system isn't.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:51 | Link to Comment knightowl77
knightowl77's picture

The 2nd Amendment is the only thing that insures the others.........if we do not exercise ALL our rights we will lose them all

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:56 | Link to Comment Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

I'm pretty much concerned about the whole Constitution.  But guns keep free men as free as they can be in this crazy world.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:08 | Link to Comment Au Shucks
Au Shucks's picture

without the 2nd, the others quickly fall.  The 2nd is the SECOND for a REASON, or is that too obvious for a "believer"?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:52 | Link to Comment SoNH80
SoNH80's picture

They're like the Energizer Bunny, they never give up.  And they're in academia, media, government, finance.... they can't govern Detroit and South Dallas, how do they expect to govern the world?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:52 | Link to Comment Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Guns breed cowards. Their pre-decessor, Long Bows, changed the face of war-fare forever.

A clear pinnacle of such cowardice is the hero-ization of Snipers (see Chris Kyle, American Hero/Sniper). And of course now drones.

It's a never ending downward spiral.

Guns breed cowards. Cowards who think they are brave. Some Colnel recently said it took courage to be a drone pilot.

Enough said.

ori

war-inc

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:57 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

I junked you.  They are equalizers.  If we had to rely upon brawn, there would be no equality amoung men.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:09 | Link to Comment Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

True Dr. No.

They equalize the ability to kill. I understand thier place as an anti-fascist tool.

But then, remember Randy Weaver.

Remember Waco.

Remember Katrina?

To think you can out-gun big gov. is dumb. If the aim (hah!) is to go down fighting, have at em.

ori

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:20 | Link to Comment Chump
Chump's picture

Sooo...just give up?  Let the fact that the government has the ability to annihilate individuals and small groups deter us from fighting back?  You apparently assume that we could never manage to be as resourceful as Afghani goat-herders or the Vietcong.

You'd be one of the colonists crying fearfully that mighty England would crush a few mere colonies.

You started out with a blanket statement that guns are for cowards, yet now you say they are useful for self defense.  You can't have it both ways.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:03 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Chump for Sheriff

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:20 | Link to Comment Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

I would have a go at that stupidity but you do not know of what you speak..  Stick with the navy pal..  Waco, how did the ATF do again?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:39 | Link to Comment new game
new game's picture

my fight is not against the gov. but suddenly i realize it may just may be my neighbor; it is called survival; or shall we label it individual liberty at an extremey local/person'l level?!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:28 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

You mean after the ATF executed an illegal warrant, got themselves shot to shit, fabricated propaganda about child abuse and then finally resorted to purposefully burning said children to death in a fiery inferno? That Waco?

Oh yeah, I forgot about the contribution of fed sniper Lon Horiuchi who shot Vicky Weaver in the head (from 100 yards away... ) while she was nursing her baby and also was present at Waco, spreading his "love" amongst the women and children there too.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:56 | Link to Comment Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

BINGO, real facts...  Read them and weep for our country..

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:42 | Link to Comment Gene Parmesan
Gene Parmesan's picture

Coward.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:19 | Link to Comment ATM
ATM's picture

Remember the American Revolution.

Remember the French Revolution. 

Remember the Haitian Revolution.

Remember the Phillipine Revolition, the Serbian Revolution, Mexican War for Independence, the Belgian Revolution, the Texas Revolution, the Afghan Uprising, Young Turks, Mexican Revolution, October Revolution, Turkish war of independence, August Revolt Vietnam, Chinese Civil War under Mao,  Algerian Revolution, Cuban Revolution, Eritrean War for independence, ...............................................................

Yeah, armed people never win against the big bad government. You're either a dumb fuck or a paid shill of the establishment but maybe both!

 

 

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:33 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

The Afghanis have yet to go down.  They're still fighting the bloody English and their American cannon fodder, amazingly successfully considering the asymmetry of it all, with small arms and smaller budgets.  They are an excellent example of a people that are "out-gunning big government".

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:03 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

Yeah. The mujahadeen are really getting their asses handed to them by the most powerful military in the world. /s

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:22 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

The Afghans have made fools out of two super powers.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:58 | Link to Comment Fred C Dobbs
Fred C Dobbs's picture

silly.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:59 | Link to Comment youngman
youngman's picture

Long Bows......WTF....forever...yeah I see alot of them in the hood.....the rappers all got a gold plated one....stuffed down their pants...lol...cowards...yeah right....only to a lefty...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:02 | Link to Comment quasimodo
quasimodo's picture

CONgrats ori. You win the most stupid fucking post of the day. Props to you considering it's not even noon here yet in the US.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:03 | Link to Comment Decay is Constant
Decay is Constant's picture

So what?  Back to swords?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:03 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Short bows... .now those are the mark of a hero...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:09 | Link to Comment GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

From horseback.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:28 | Link to Comment Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

Rocks. And if you are very resourceful, maybe a sling to lob them. That is manly.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 13:00 | Link to Comment Grinder74
Grinder74's picture

Unless you were David.  'Cuz we all know he was Jonathan's ghey lover.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:38 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

In Japan swords are illegal as well as firearms.  It'll be back to pointed sticks until they outlaw them as well.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:59 | Link to Comment Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Stabbing attack kills seven in Tokyo, evil always finds a way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxFdCZy5-z8

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:05 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

How many were killed/sent to the hospital in that sarin gas attack in Japan a few years ago?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:05 | Link to Comment Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Indian, Obviously your mama dropped you as a child. Its not your fault.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:10 | Link to Comment GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Obviously, your mama was also your sister and cousin, it's your "daddy"'s fault.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:07 | Link to Comment The Count
The Count's picture

Ummmmm....let me guess. You live in England? Where even carrying pocket knives in public is pretty mucn illegal? The country that has become the nanny state par excellence?

 

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:15 | Link to Comment Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

In the UK the cops will shoot you, even if incocent, in the head 7 FUCKING times WHILE HOLDING YOU on the ground. Sounds real safe to me. Maybe innocent folks need guns to protect them from the govt terrorists....errr police.

 

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:16 | Link to Comment Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Lost the link in the edit. Here it is.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:36 | Link to Comment writingsonthewall
writingsonthewall's picture

Yes - and if Charles De Menzes and all the occupant of the tube that day were armed - would there have been?

 

a) More deaths?

b) Less deaths?

 

You just traded up from 1 state murder to about 15 cases of murder - Well done for bringing peace to Britain.

 

Maybe you need to actually visit. Most muggers use knifes which is far preferable to an automatic weapon (you can run from a knife you can't from a gun)

 

In the states most muggers already carry guns because they expect their victims to carry them too

...but you cliam this a safer situation? - mmmm more bullshit

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:49 | Link to Comment Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

You attempt to JUSTIFY state murder with a fantasy murder of fifteen people? How delusional are you? Are you so desperate to make a case that has no argument in its' favor? Moron.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:25 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

Since the liberalization of concealed carry, muggings in the US are extremely rare (except maybe in cities like NY, LA, and Chicago where the hoods know that handguns are banned).  Also, the police hunt down muggers like dogs because they know those idiots are one step away from murdering someone.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:06 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

You have just summed up the real reason for the 2nd Amendment to the BOR.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:46 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Not just England.  I've been informed that the machete that I have under the seat of my truck is illegal to carry and can get me into a lot of trouble.  It's not even for protection although it can be used for that.  I have it to clear weeds and brush and instead of a small hatchet.   I live in a rural area.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:03 | Link to Comment The Count
The Count's picture

where do you live? put that machete in the trunk, could make all the difference. add one or 2 other gardening tools and your should be OK.

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:55 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Pickup trucks don't have trunks.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 15:30 | Link to Comment The Count
The Count's picture

Pickup trucks have lockable storage! At least 90 percent of them.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 17:58 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

The lockable storage is under and behind the seat.  This is the only lockable storage most modern pickups come with.   The lock is on the doors that gain entry into the cab of the truck where the drive sits.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 15:51 | Link to Comment Chump
Chump's picture

It seems the point would be that you shouldn't have to hide/justify your possession of a common tool to mouth-breathing thugs.

If a machete is "against ze rules" then they'd probably wet themselves if they saw my bush axe.

I'm also not sure where you got your stats for pickups with lockable storage.  90% of pickups certainly don't have any from the factory except maybe the glove compartment, and this:

http://www.smkw.com/large/knife/CTC122C.jpg

ain't gonna fit.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:50 | Link to Comment LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

The English called they want their guns back

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_Cn5U0odx0

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:13 | Link to Comment PatientZero
PatientZero's picture

Euro-poor detected.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:26 | Link to Comment Red Heeler
Red Heeler's picture

"Guns breed cowards."

If you say that in my neck of the woods you'll find out it ain't true by way of a invitation to a fist fight.

Or is it your opinion, ORI, that fists breed cowards too?

"If we take the generally accepted definition of bravery as a quality which knows not fear, I have never seen a brave man. All men are frightened. The more intelligent they are, the more they are frightened. The courageous man is the man who forces himself, in spite of his fear, to carry on. Discipline, pride, self-respect, self-confidence, and the love of glory are attributes which will make a man courageous even when he is afraid." - War As I Knew It, p. 322, George S. Patton, Jr.

"Any soldier who surrenders with arms in his hands is not doing his duty to his country and is selling himself short, because the living conditions of the prisoner of war are extremely bad." - War As I Knew It, p. 328, George S. Patton, Jr.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:36 | Link to Comment N. B. Forrest
N. B. Forrest's picture

"God made all men, but Samuel Colt made them all equal"

 

I guess people like you were saying the same things about iron swords at the end of the bronze age. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:24 | Link to Comment NeedtoSecede
NeedtoSecede's picture

The only cowards I am seeing are all the gutless politicians.

Secession Anyone?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:40 | Link to Comment fhk96
fhk96's picture

This statement "Guns breed cowards" makes me believe you are a historically ignorant, smug, wet bologna flower.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:55 | Link to Comment jjsilver
jjsilver's picture

All your rights are there when you are born. They can only be taken from you by force or consent.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:55 | Link to Comment AchtungAffen
AchtungAffen's picture

Yeah! More guns! That's the only way to prevent the violence issues of a society riddled with too much guns...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:00 | Link to Comment Fred C Dobbs
Fred C Dobbs's picture

Don't buy any.

 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:35 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

Hey Achtung,question for ya.

One I pose to all anti gunners.

IF I load a weapon with 100 rounds, and lay it on a table,in 1000yrs will it have killed anyone, or fired?.

NO..................

Weapons are tools, and it takes a finger to activate them.

Just like Colorado,they have had 3 mass murder scenes.

Why?,because their legislature, and Governors are stupid.

IF Concealed carry were allowed, this crap would all but cease. Serial murderers are cowards and only murder where they have no chance of getting one between the eyes,at least until they complete their tasks.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:47 | Link to Comment N. B. Forrest
N. B. Forrest's picture

There are a handful of cities in Colorado where you are NOT allowed to concealed carry.  Aurora just happens to be one of them. 

 

Do you think this guy would have killed 12 and injured 60 others in a theater a few miles south in Douglas county?  Hell no, he would have been shot to pieces. 

 

Yes, yes I know he was wearing body armor, but there are pleanty of people who would have taken head shots at the lunatic. Plus there are lots of guys who I know who concealed carry .41 and .45s.  One of those shot to a chest would have knocked the guy over and broken a few ribs.  Perfect opportunity to bum rush him and beat the hell out of him. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 21:37 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

It's not really clear what kind of vest he had on.  He purchased a "tactical vest" which might just be one of those nylon vests with magazine pouches on the front.  No problem to punch through.  The media has completely run away with this story.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:48 | Link to Comment AchtungAffen
AchtungAffen's picture

If everyone had a concealed gun in the theater during the shootout, it means everybody would be firing in a dark room filled with tear gas... Hardly the best of situations.

You may say whatever about guns being tools and stuff, but the facts are clear. If you want to stop gun violence the best proven way is to ban guns. Look at Japan and the UK.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:03 | Link to Comment knightowl77
knightowl77's picture

The UK has a lot of crime and the crime rate is rising....

In Switzerland every male over the age of 18 is issued an automatic rifle with 200 rounds, which they keep in their home. Crime is low there too.....Guns don't cause crime moron

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:01 | Link to Comment FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Not every male -- just the ones that are in the army (which is most of them).  The ammunition is under seal and not allowed to be in the rifle, so it wouldn't be much use against a criminal.  The Swiss, unlike the Anglo-Americans, don't have much crime because it's not their nature to steal and violate the civil rights of others.  The Swiss don't invade other countries or amass stockpiles of offensive weapons like the Anglo-Americans either.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:10 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

Their issued ammo is sealed, but they are encouraged to practice regularly, and indeed ammo purchased at a shooting range is gov't subsidized to make it more affordable.

BTW, that seal wouldn't stop a guy from going postal any more than gun-free zones stop mass shootings. It's a crazy world that we live in, and no law or body of laws is gonna make it un-crazy.

Remember the Boy Scout motto: Be prepared.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:03 | Link to Comment N. B. Forrest
N. B. Forrest's picture

Would that have been a great situation?  No.  But it would have been a hell of a lot better situation than 12 dead and 60+ wounded. 

 

People who pass the concealed carry classes are taught how and when to fire.  They wouldn't have just randomly started firing.  They would have shot the bad guy.  And when it comes to lighting... It obviously was light enough in there for Mr. Joker to see what he was doing. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:30 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

How/where does a civilian get tear gas canisters anyway? They have those at Walmart?

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:11 | Link to Comment Overfed
Overfed's picture

It was just a smoke bomb. That smoke is pretty acrid.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 11:40 | Link to Comment Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

So MSM saying he had tear gas was just more "accurate", "verified" reporting by the propaganda machine, er I mean journalists?  Shock...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 21:42 | Link to Comment aerojet
aerojet's picture

The media has reported many inaccuracies to try and enhance the sensationalism of this story.  The guy had smoke bombs, a tactical vest that may or may not have had kevlar layers, and an AR-15 type rifle he likely never fired before the attack.  Oh, and some ridiculous 90-round drum that wouldn't feed right.  A real pro!  We're all lucky he wasn't as smart as the NIH seems to think he was!

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:54 | Link to Comment PiratePawpaw
PiratePawpaw's picture

Your logic is stunning!..........

Clearly a person willing to commit murder, robbery, or another violent crime despite the laws and punishments already on the books will be dissuaded by the fact that illegally acquiring a banned firearm would make them guilty of ANOTHER (and lesser) offense.

So the threat of being sentenced to 100 years wouldnt deter them, but 105 years would?.........

Brilliant!......../sarc

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:49 | Link to Comment 1100-TACTICAL-12
1100-TACTICAL-12's picture

A well armed society is a polite society. All you pussies need to go live on your own pussiefied island somewhere let the men handle the real work.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:01 | Link to Comment Agent P
Agent P's picture

If you should ever find yourself in a situation where you need to protect the safety of you and your loved ones from a violent human being with criminal intent, please dial 911 and wait patiently for law enforcement to arrive...they will do an excellent job of protecting you just as soon as they arrive.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:05 | Link to Comment N. B. Forrest
N. B. Forrest's picture

Absolutely.  When seconds count, law enforcement is just minutes away. 

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:10 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

Absolutely.  When seconds count, law enforcement is just minutes away. 

I love the reasoning of antis.

SCOTUS ruled years ago ,the LE Community is not liable,nor is it their job to protect you, and yours.

Its YOUR responsibility to protect your family,yourself, and property.Police are great,most of the time,except they are Reactive, not Proactive.They 99% of the time show up after the deeds are done.

Rather be Judged by 12, than carried by 6.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 12:34 | Link to Comment NeedtoSecede
NeedtoSecede's picture

AA why do you and all your NWO libtard sheep only apply this line of thinking to guns?  We have a debt and spending problem and the libtard response is more spending and more debt.  So AA, it must follow that if we solve a debt problem with more debt, then we absolutely should solve the gun "problem" with more guns, correct?  I am glad you are on board and thanks for clearing that up for me. Bullish!

Except all my guns were lost in an unfortunate ice skating accident when they fell through the ice.  I think it was global warming...

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 14:51 | Link to Comment fhk96
fhk96's picture

Chicks dig 'em.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 08:56 | Link to Comment youngman
youngman's picture

I think let the rest of the world pass this law...impliment it....then he USA can sell at high inflated black market prices the weapons anyone wants and needs....and it will pay off our debt in one year I bet....easy money

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 10:06 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

I think let the rest of the world pass this law...impliment it....then he USA can sell at high inflated black market prices the weapons anyone wants and needs....and it will pay off our debt in one year I bet....easy money

Let em pass it,we in the US do not kowtow to Intl Law, or the UN.The Congress can make a law to make anything they do VOID.

The Senate has to give a two thirds majority to swing it, and that ain't gonna happen.Not EVEN in an election year.

Treaties are only valid if you go along with them.

Wed, 07/25/2012 - 09:00 | Link to Comment Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Bloomberg wants all cops to go on strike till Americans give up their guns. I think we would have more need of those guns during that strike.

 

The man is an idiot but it points out whats going on here. This treaty is part of it. We remain able to take back our freedom as long as we have guns.

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/hizzoner_striking_idea_for_police_Oqz...

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!