-35 votes

Nobody is "coming for your guns"

We are falling for it all over again. Just when we start to think we are the enlightened ones, the powers that be show us that we can be fooled by the same old tricks.

America’s guns are not going to be taken away. Our government lacks the political will and man power to accomplish such a task especially in the face of tens of millions of private gun owners who far outnumber the military and police forces of our nation. That disparity grows even further when you factor in the notion that most of those police and military are firm believers in the 2nd Amendment which they swore to defend.

Is gun control really a valid debate in this country right now? Is the most well -armed country in the world really in any danger of losing their right to carry firearms? Or, are we simply being distracted yet again from the true injustice taking place in our country, the devaluation and theft of our currency?

Politicians have been fooling the masses for ages by arguing issues which have no chance of changing in any practical manner. Presidential candidates argue about abortion, knowing full well that nothing will change. They pretend to care about immigration, foreign wars, etc. when in reality, both parties end up continuing the same basic policies as their predecessors.

They do this because it keeps us distracted from the fact that they continue to steal our money. If we are busy supporting the left because we want gun control, we don’t notice that the left is stealing our money. If we are busy supporting the right because we want to end abortion, we don’t notice that the right is stealing our money. They tax it away, and they inflate it away, all the while we are busy arguing about laws which are not changing, and will not change. There may be small areas of the country where these things are more or less accepted, or even states who try to pass their own laws, but in reality, abortion and guns aren’t going away no matter what either side says. The only thing that is going away while we are focused on mass shootings and whatever else the media feeds us, is the value of our currency.

Even when the politicians talk about the budget and inflation, they still distract us from the real problem. They argue about the budget, faking like we are going off a cliff if one side or the other doesn’t get what they want. In reality, we already went off the cliff and both sides of the argument wouldn’t have it any other way. If the left wins the argument and gets everything they want, we are in debt $1.6 trillion for the year. If the right wins, maybe it’s only $1.5 trillion. In either case, their debate doesn’t have any really effect on the problem.

Why is this charade taking place? I think it’s as simple as this the fact that printing money makes the Federal Reserve rich, so the people making money off our currency collapse continue to fund the campaigns of those who further the problem. So while mom and dad argue over the remote control, the burglars are robbing us blind.

Even as I am convinced that this is the source of the problem, and so I am not particularly scared of losing my right to own a firearm, I also see clearly that a collapse of our currency and then our economy, could full well have the effect of creating the political will to make these changes which currently seem so unlikely. While I'd disagree with many of you who believe that this was the plan all along, I certainly see the possibility. Rest assured however, that while the pessimist in me doesn’t see us overcoming the fiscal disaster, the optimist in me knows that when it happens, the only ones armed will be those who still believe in the 2nd Amendment.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Right

Because as we know, if it's in the Constitution there's no way it will be violated...
That's never happened before.

/sarcasm

Straw man arguments

Our government lacks the political will and man power to accomplish such a task especially in the face of tens of millions of private gun owners who far outnumber the military and police forces of our nation.

Tell that to every country that's ever been disarmed by its government.

Losing our guns is a greater threat to us than our crashing economy. We can rebuild from a financial crisis, but if we lose our guns we're done.

That disparity grows even further when you factor in the notion that most of those police and military are firm believers in the 2nd Amendment which they swore to defend.

Both police and military personnel have been guilty of inhibiting their fellow citizens' rights, so this is utter nonsense.
We've seen they are more loyal to their job and government than they are their friends and family.

History is repeating itself.

It can't hurt to be vigilant

Semper Vigilans!

there is s a multifaceted approach here

I do believe that the government and the people that are on the feds payroll use these points to distract us from the theft and devaluation of our dollar.
However. I also believe that it falls hand in hand with the many attacks that these people on their payroll perpetuate on our bill of rights and the constitution.
To say that these do not go hand in hand is a little delusional. I don't mean this in an offensive way to you though. It is logical to want to put it this way for you but you are missing the piece of the puzzle with this equation to your conclusion. This is because you aren't seeing the slow decay that is being placed on the bill of rights and constitution. It's real. It's there happening in front of our eyes. That is why it is so important to have the knowledge of history and past events. Like how Judge Andrew Napolitano said in a lecture, paraphrased, "ask yourself. Are you more free today than you were yesterday?"
I don't fault you for your conclusion but you just need to think more macro. Expand your knowledge more into history and see this large picture of the problem. If not a literal gun grab now it will be later. For now it is an attempt at a figurative, legislative removal of guns which history has shown is where it leads to. Someone I was discussing this with last night said the same thing but they could not see how it did this like you propose. I explained to them what I just did here and they could not grasp it. She said, "Obama and this administration are not coming for your guns." I said, " If a law is put in place that makes it illegal to own something how do you not see that it is essentially coming for our guns? Legal and constitutional one day. Illegal and unusable the next for moral law abiding people. Removed through paper in a figurative sense." How does one not see it in this way?

Homeland security statement: patriotism is now considered terrorism.
I love www.isidewith.com shared it with everyone I know. If anything they realize its not just a red and blue idiot running for reelection.

Every journey begins with a single step.

This is simply the first step on the road to confiscation.

Yes, the monetary system must be fixed first, but is it

possible to do so?

Perhaps what we need to look at is the order in which things went south.

The Monetary system, and the so-called income tax along with it, didn't come about until 1913.

Same with elected Senators.

There were many problems and mistakes that led to those three.

We need to trace back father, and look at more systemic problems.

I suggest, that the FIRST thing we need to fix goes all the way back to the first amendment.

That is, the first amendment proposed, not the first amendment adopted.

Many do not know that the "Bill of Rights" was not originally 10 amendments. Congress proposed 12.

The most requested amendment dealt with the size of congressional districts. However, due to either an error, or an intentional manipulation, the language of that amendment, Article the First, rendered it useless so it was not ratified. The second article later became Amendment 27.

The size of Congressional Districts is directly related to how well Congress behaves. If representatives are too far removed from their constituents, if they can get elected without having to personally reach each constituent, if they have too many constituents to deal with, then we fall to the error of "virtual representation" and a Congress that is severely out of touch with reality.

We FIRST need to pass a corrected Article the First which limits Congressional districts to 50,000 inhabitants as the Framers counseled us.

We can then proceed to correct the errors in the House rules which allow too much power in the leadership, and not enough in the membership as originally intended.

We can then proceed to correct the errors of the 14th, 16th and 17th amendments, and to end the FED and restore sound money.

After that, the rest will easily fall into place.

Go back to the source of the problem - Congressional Districts that were too large to begin with leading to virtual rather than actual representation.

great point

I didn't know this. Thank you I learned something. It makes complete sense though.

350,000,000/50,000 = 7000. Were gonna need a bigger cage. Lol.

It's a starting point but the number is gonna need to be a little bigger :p

Homeland security statement: patriotism is now considered terrorism.
I love www.isidewith.com shared it with everyone I know. If anything they realize its not just a red and blue idiot running for reelection.

It can't be much bigger. That's the problem.

We'll have to maybe introduce some different ways of doing business in the halls of D.C, but we can't have large districts.

The biggest problems pre-civil war, which in fact led to war, began after the average district got larger than 50,000.

Also, I don't think we're at 350million yet. I think we're closer to just over 300m. That puts us around 6,000 representatives. Still large, but not as bad.

**using 2010 census estimates from 2008 when I did the math last, I found if we had adopted this for 2010, we'd have 6,190 members of the House right now with districts capped at 50k.

More like somewhere between

More like somewhere between 7,000 and 14,000. States can't divide into perfectly sized 50,000 person portions.

I've already done the math. It's easier than you think.

Simply divide the number of people in a state by 50,000. Whatever number you get, round up to the next whole number. This is the number of districts/representatives that State is entitled to in the House.

If you then divide this result back into the total state population, you get a figure that is the average size of districts in that state. Now compare the state averages to each other.

The result of this is that no district will vary with any other district than by more than about 3,500 inhabitants. This works out to about 7% variance.

By contrast, current districts can vary by as much as nearly 100%. The largest district in the country is almost twice the size of the smallest one. And that's as a result of some very ridiculous calculus. I just beat them at the goal with simple math.

Most of the districts would be within less than 1000 inhabitants variance easily.

"Nobody"

More commonly known as Obama...

When Fascism goes to sleep, it checks under the bed for Ron Paul!

You sound like you're quoting Satan.

He whispers, "There is no devil", so in other words, "Be complacent. Don't worry about consequences for action/ inaction."

Here's a true story (abbreviated immensely) in my life from this past Saturday.

I taught an all-day Citizenship in the Nation merit badge class to 30 boy scouts. One of the scouts told me his father was a police officer and that he was in the bldg. I went to talk with that officer (off duty) during our lunch break and asked him in light of honoring his oath to support the Constitution, "If the Congress or Executive branch of the fed gov't ordered you by "law" or executive order to confiscate weapons from the people in your neighborhood and kill any that resisted, would you do it?"

He replied, "YES I WOULD," then proceeded to chastise me like a thug policeman belittling a miscreant, "But that will never happen in America. Only conspiracy theorists waste time on such nonsense."

I replied boldly, and testified to the truth (quoting history), and there is more to the story, but I just wanted to point out that this police officer said the SAME thing you're saying, and had the non nonsensical argument that it won't happen, "but I'll do it if ordered to do so." Huh?

We are in troubled times.

The devil is real. His servants are real.

This is a spiritual battle. Choose sides, and know that God and the forces of good will ultimately prevail. I pray that we won't have much bloodshed, but if people don't start speaking up the criminals in the gov't will most assuredly start to kill us "legally", as the NDAA is already law, and now they move on our guns.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

The gun debate is a distraction

it may be a real 'discussion', but while this goes on there are other heinous things that are covered because so few people are paying attention.

My call (wrong or not) is that when this fiscal cliff subterfuge is over, then the gun stuff will just fade away.

-quiet engineer

coming for your personal info and spreading it in databases

isn't bad enough?

The fourth amendment should not be breached to permit exercise of the 2d.

Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesnt want to hear -RonPaul

Denise B's picture

"America’s guns are not going to be taken away"

...have you seen the top post on the front page today?

"America’s guns are not going to be taken away"

Dangerous presumption

Why are you still here?

Why are you still here?

Southern Agrarian

Because you guys are still wrong....

...Obama spends $500 million on measures that will do nothing to disarm the public, and you guys are still sold on the idea that he thinks he can take our guns. He keeps spending money, we keep getting poorer, and you guys keep arguing about whatever he and the media feed to you.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

My brother

I think that you are spot on with your claims. However I believe deep down that this was a battle Needed to occur and continue to occur. I stand with you on your claims of out of control debt and spending. We all agree the FED needs to END. We have to take the battles as they come. We are with you and we have NOT run from the fight of Austrian economics. We have secured our 2nd so we can proceed with our first.

It's still working

Obama releases this list of nothing, and you all will debate about how much this actually limits guns, meanwhile, all these things cost money and all this gun debate stuff continues to distract the nation from our debt. That's all this is about.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

It was not a list of nothing.

It was not a list of nothing. In fact it could end up disarming most of our nation. Get a clue.

Disagree With Post......

This country has already been broke for years. We have already gone over the edge. The only reason that paper dollars still even spend is because the tptsb are still using them. Once they decide to switch to their next fiat money is when the dollar actually fails to work.

Look MONEY IS AN ILLUSION. It's value and strength only work because the people BELIEVE that it's real. The dollar will die when those that gave it life, kill it by announcing that it's dead shattering the illusion on their TV shows.

I disagree with your gun issue also, but gotta get to work. Maybe go there later.

Because: Some animals are more equal than other animals. -Animal Farm-

What the? > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MTIwY3_-ks

Whatever the media is pushing

as front page BREAKING NEWS, is usually a distraction.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

They have been stealing our money

right in front of our faces for years with no need of distraction and they are never challenged for their theft. Why do they all of the sudden need a distraction to continue their theft?

I'm beginning to think the whole gun confiscation scare is to make people buy, buy, buy to keep the economy floating as long as possible. And what about all the guns and ammo that are being bought? Irrelevant. Rifles and magazines are no match for tanks and drones.

Of course the more we buy then the more they steal so your deduction may be right even if the premise is off a little.

Dude, you can't take out

Dude, you can't take out millions of people with tanks and drones. Those thinks are barely a factor in any of this - they aren't super weapons.

Millions? Do you really believe that?

What makes you think they would have to take out millions? I think you overestimate how many people would resist and out of those who would actually resist to the point of death.

Apparently You Have Not Seen This Chart

http://usahitman.com/wp-content/uploads/2QHsX.jpg

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

Interesting chart

Are you trying to say that the number of dead listed in the chart were those who laid down their lives in defense of their right to bear arms or is it those who lost there live as a result of not having a right to bear arms. A meaningful difference wouldn't you say.

I can Only Assume It Would Be A Mix From Both Camps ...

but I will grant you that probably around 80+% would be in the latter camp.

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

While I agree....

...that it wouldn't be that many people resisting, I also think that the will of the military to support such actions isn't very intense either. I just don't see that many people supporting a forceful government against gun toting Americans.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).