Why does the government want your guns?

[Merkava_4]

Why does the government want your guns? Have you ever thought about that?

Here's another question:

What keeps the government in power? I'll tell you, it's quite simple really:

1. The control over the belief system
2. The control over the financial system
3. The control over violence

The control over the belief system

Why do you pay your taxes? Because you believe that if you don't, you'll be put in jail.

Why do you pull over to the side of the road when the policeman turns on his flashing red lights? Because you believe he has the authority to do so.

Why do you go to work to earn wages? Because you believe that with those dollars earned, you'll be able to purchase goods and services.


The control over the financial system

As long as the government assures its citizens that the dollar has value, the government maintains control over the financial system. The government maintains the dollar's value by making sure it remains the world's reserve currency by making sure that only dollars are used to buy oil. As long as the world needs dollars to buy oil, and as long as oil is the predominant source of energy, the dollar will always have value.


The control over violence

What keeps control over violence and makes sure violence is kept to a minimum? Our law enforcement officers; and just incase that line of defense fails, we have our military.


What if ... what if the belief system failed because the citizens no longer felt the government had any legitimate authority?

What if ... what if the financial system failed because the dollar no longer had value?


So now the citizens no longer believe that the government is legitimate; the dollar has no value; and the citizens are angry. So what does the government have left to fall back on? They still have the control over violence don't they? Of course they do, by utilizing their law enforcement officers and their military. But there's one small problem: THE SECOND AMENDMENT. The people are still armed. "Oh gosh darn," the government says; "we should have taken their guns away earlier."

For more information on this subject, visit this link:

The Death Throes of the United States

[xShane]

Originally Posted by Merkava_4

Why does the government want your guns? Have you ever thought about that?

Here's another question:

What keeps the government in power? I'll tell you, it's quite simple really:

1. The control over the belief system
2. The control over the financial system
3. The control over violence

The control over the belief system

Why do you pay your taxes? Because you believe that if you don't, you'll be put in jail.

Why do you pull over to the side of the road when the policeman turns on his flashing red lights? Because you believe he has the authority to do so.

Why do you go to work to earn wages? Because you believe that with those dollars earned, you'll be able to purchase goods and services.


The control over the financial system

As long as the government assures its citizens that the dollar has value, the government maintains control over the financial system. The government maintains the dollar's value by making sure it remains the world's reserve currency by making sure that only dollars are used to buy oil. As long as the world needs dollars to buy oil, and as long as oil is the predominant source of energy, the dollar will always have value.


The control over violence

What keeps control over violence and makes sure violence is kept to a minimum? Our law enforcement officers; and just incase that line of defense fails, we have our military.


What if ... what if the belief system failed because the citizens no longer felt the government had any legitimate authority?

What if ... what if the financial system failed because the dollar no longer had value?


So now the citizens no longer believe that the government is legitimate; the dollar has no value; and the citizens are angry. So what does the government have left to fall back on? They still have the control over violence don't they? Of course they do, by utilizing their law enforcement officers and their military. But there's one small problem: THE SECOND AMENDMENT. The people are still armed. "Oh gosh darn," the government says; "we should have taken their guns away earlier."

For more information on this subject, visit this link:

The Death Throes of the United States

Wow, just wow. This has got to be one of the craziest troll attempts I've ever seen.

1. The United States has some of the lowest tax rates of all the first world countries. Yet, we still have to uphold all these expectations (health care, a strong military, etc). This stuff is NOT free. It has to be paid for. It amazes me how some people think that all of a sudden we're going to pay for all this stuff, yet continue, and even decrease, taxes.

2. No one pulls over because they think the flashing red lights gives "them" the authority to pull you over. It's because you likely broke a law, and you have to deal with the consequences of doing so.

3. If the government really were trying to take over, the firepower of the military far exceeds that of civilians pistols and rifles. Our military obeys orders. They have missiles, mortars, tanks, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, laser-guided missiles, jets, guns that would literally blow a hole in a car (if not vaporizing it). You think that your pistol or rifle is going to match up? Get real. At the time the second amendment was written, warfare advancements weren't as great as they are now.

P.S. I clicked to a random time segment in that video, just to see how much BS it was full of. First thing I heard was how by giving the power to coin money over to the largest private bank in the world... Wait, what? The power to coin money is a reserved power only to the legislative branch (Congress specifically). These "types" of videos usually use big and government related words/legal terms in order to get uneducated people to fall prey to them.

[pcmxa]

Ummmmmmmm? It isn't the government that wants your guns. It is your fellow citizens. And they don't want them, they want you not to have them. Why? because they are sick of you killing your friends, family, and other people's children with them.

[mudslag]

Originally Posted by Merkava_4

snip

Im a pro-gun Democrat, though also I believe that there is nothing wrong with having rules and regulations regarding guns. As it stands now, the ONLY ones talking about taking guns away from people are the extreme pro-gun nuts that use this excuse to bitch and moan about the current administration and/or the Left. No one is trying to take your guns away.

[Happybunny]

Originally Posted by Merkava_4

Why does the government want your guns? Have you ever thought about that?

Here's another question:

What keeps the government in power? I'll tell you, it's quite simple really:

1. The control over the belief system
2. The control over the financial system
3. The control over violence

The control over the belief system

Why do you pay your taxes? Because you believe that if you don't, you'll be put in jail.

Why do you pull over to the side of the road when the policeman turns on his flashing red lights? Because you believe he has the authority to do so.

Why do you go to work to earn wages? Because you believe that with those dollars earned, you'll be able to purchase goods and services.


The control over the financial system

As long as the government assures its citizens that the dollar has value, the government maintains control over the financial system. The government maintains the dollar's value by making sure it remains the world's reserve currency by making sure that only dollars are used to buy oil. As long as the world needs dollars to buy oil, and as long as oil is the predominant source of energy, the dollar will always have value.


The control over violence

What keeps control over violence and makes sure violence is kept to a minimum? Our law enforcement officers; and just incase that line of defense fails, we have our military.


What if ... what if the belief system failed because the citizens no longer felt the government had any legitimate authority?

What if ... what if the financial system failed because the dollar no longer had value?


So now the citizens no longer believe that the government is legitimate; the dollar has no value; and the citizens are angry. So what does the government have left to fall back on? They still have the control over violence don't they? Of course they do, by utilizing their law enforcement officers and their military. But there's one small problem: THE SECOND AMENDMENT. The people are still armed. "Oh gosh darn," the government says; "we should have taken their guns away earlier."

For more information on this subject, visit this link:

The Death Throes of the United States

I could ask you the same thing, why does the Right Wing always distort the true over gun ownership, nobody from government has even talked about a total ban on firearms?

I think it's because you have lost every other argument.

[NT1440]

It must be kind of sad, and fun, to have to build your own hallways to shout down. OP, does it matter at all that no one is coming to "take yer guns!" or are your guys always, ALWAYS, going to be talking about this stuff.

Does a background check somehow take your gun from you?

[niuniu]

Are we allowed to make posts that simply, LOL.

[MadeTheSwitch]

Originally Posted by Merkava_4

Why does the government want your guns? Have you ever thought about that?

The people are still armed. "Oh gosh darn," the government says; "we should have taken their guns away earlier."

Riiight. Because an unorganized group of people with small pee shooters are such a match for an organized military with aircraft, navy destroyers, aircraft carriers, subs, satellites, drones, rocket launchers, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, biological weapons...yup..those guns will hold all that at bay. Sure it will.

[chrono1081]

Uh oh...I thought I heard the crinkling of tin foil...

[Thomas Veil]

And here I thought the OP was setting up gun advocates to explain why they think the government is coming after their weapons.

Silly me.

[glocke12]

Originally Posted by MadeTheSwitch

Riiight. Because an unorganized group of people with small pee shooters are such a match for an organized military with aircraft, navy destroyers, aircraft carriers, subs, satellites, drones, rocket launchers, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, biological weapons...yup..those guns will hold all that at bay. Sure it will.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

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

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

[JohnLT13]

Originally Posted by glocke12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

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

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

Thats all great an stuff. But I dont feel like blowing myself up, not even for a few virgins.

[APlotdevice]

Originally Posted by glocke12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

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

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

Most of the casualties in these cases have been civilian, not military. They completely disregard the rules of war. And yet still they have been absolutely no match for the US military.

[glocke12]

forgot one.

http://youtu.be/ImzD8Th4vOU

[Sydde]

Onion time

62-Year-Old With Gun Only One Standing Between Nation And Full-Scale Government Takeover

NORFOLK, VA—According to numerous reports, local 62-year-old Earl Bailey, who owns a shotgun and several boxes of ammunition, is currently the last bastion of defense between the United States of America and the federal government’s plot of a full-scale takeover.

Bailey, a recent retiree and a proud advocate of gun rights, has been confirmed by multiple sources as being a true patriot, and is, at present, the only person capable of preventing top-secret forces within the government from striking and forcefully coercing hundreds of millions of Americans to submit to a fascist and brutal New World Order.

Since the early 1990s, sources estimated the gun owner has staved off innumerable large-scale government threats, all from the center of his 12-acre ranch.

“It is every American’s right to be good and armed, and that’s a right that should always be protected,” said Bailey, now the sole American protecting the nation from the government’s hidden plot of disarming all citizens, gradually gaining control of the mass media, and installing martial law throughout the nation’s streets. “Our Founding Fathers intended for each and every one of us to protect ourselves from tyranny. That’s what America is all about.”

“What happens when the feds show up at your front door and start telling you how much meat you can eat or how to raise your kids?” continued the lifetime NRA member, brandishing the very weapon that now serves as the final hope of staving off a totalitarian state. “Is that the future you want?”

Bailey, who keeps his gun on his person at all times and regularly patrols his property in his truck, has reportedly struck dread into the very highest-ranking members of the U.S. government. According to sources, top government and military officials are fully aware that they remain unable to commence with their oppressive, systematic subjugation of the American populace as long as the 62-year-old owner of a rifle exists.

Additional reports confirmed that Bailey’s frequent practice of shooting his gun at empty bean cans in his backyard has repeatedly forced government officials to reassess both their ground and air strategies for the impending takeover.

“The way I see it, the Second Amendment’s been keeping this nation free and secure for well over 200 years,” Bailey said, valiantly standing in front of his home that is constantly being monitored by CIA agents and elite Special Forces operatives, who are told to maintain a safe distance from the formidable 62-year-old. “First they’ll come for our guns and next…well, shoot, I don’t really plan on ever seeing what the hell happens next.”

While the federal government is more than adequately prepared to begin the first phase of its plan of convoying Second Amendment adherents to newly established FEMA concentration camps, high-level members of the Obama Administration involved in the widespread conspiracy confirmed that they have been forced to resort to alternate methods due solely to Bailey’s heroics.

“As long as there’s someone like Earl out there with a gun and ammunition, we are unable to carry out our attack on America,” said Maxwell Caufield, a covert military leader in charge of the operation to turn the country into an authoritarian, one-party state wherein the basic rights of citizens are stripped away in order to create total government control. “Try as we did to spread our distorted gun control propaganda—claiming that it would protect innocent people across the country from needless deaths—the man just wouldn’t bite. There is simply nothing we can do about Earl and his gun, damn him.”

“You’ve got to hand it to him, really,” Caufield added. “If it weren’t for Earl, you’d be looking at a totally different country.”

[danpass]

Originally Posted by xShane

.....First thing I heard was how by giving the power to coin money over to the largest private bank in the world... Wait, what? The power to coin money is a reserved power only to the legislative branch.....

Congress transferred its coinage power to the Federal Reserve ......... a private entity.


But you knew that of course ....... right?

Originally Posted by MadeTheSwitch

Riiight. Because an unorganized group of people with small pee shooters are such a match for an organized military with aircraft, navy destroyers, aircraft carriers, subs, satellites, drones, rocket launchers, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, biological weapons...yup..those guns will hold all that at bay. Sure it will.

There were some dudes in the later 1700's who got organized and would disagree.

[Spectrum Abuser]

Originally Posted by MadeTheSwitch

Riiight. Because an unorganized group of people with small pee shooters are such a match for an organized military with aircraft, navy destroyers, aircraft carriers, subs, satellites, drones, rocket launchers, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, biological weapons...yup..those guns will hold all that at bay. Sure it will.

I'd recommend that anyone spouting information about the hypothetical actions of the US military read the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Specifically 892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION. An order to attack unarmed citizens would become unlawful and thus require a soldier to disobey.

[MadeTheSwitch]

Originally Posted by glocke12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

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

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

Oh I do hope that you aren't suggesting that a culture that is used to fighting wars for literally 100's of years is comparable to a culture that sits on it's butt in front of the TV having all the conveniences in life and where a war of even a decade is considered "long".

Additionally, it is QUITE a different matter when invading another country and having to ship everything overseas vs. dealing with insurgence in your own backyard. Especially when you are holding back and NOT using your full arsenal. If you think your little gun is protecting you from tyranny Glocke, then you are suffering from some serious delusions.

Originally Posted by danpass

There were some dudes in the later 1700's who got organized and would disagree.

See above. Today's Americans couldn't hold a candle to the people of that day. We have gotten soft. Which is fine..cause the government isn't coming to get anyone's guns. They just want your tax revenue.

[skottichan]

Originally Posted by Spectrum Abuser

I'd recommend that anyone spouting information about the hypothetical actions of the US military read the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Specifically 892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION. An order to attack unarmed citizens would become unlawful and thus require a soldier to disobey.

That's good, since I'm unarmed, too bad for people with guns I guess.

[APlotdevice]

Originally Posted by danpass

There were some dudes in the later 1700's who got organized and would disagree.

Back then there wasn't much of a gap between civilian and military hardware.

[adnbek]

Sometime I miss the downvote button....

[Ugg]

Originally Posted by Spectrum Abuser

I'd recommend that anyone spouting information about the hypothetical actions of the US military read the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Specifically 892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION. An order to attack unarmed citizens would become unlawful and thus require a soldier to disobey.

Can you explain Kent State then?

[mrkramer]

Originally Posted by danpass

There were some dudes in the later 1700's who got organized and would disagree.

Who had aircraft carriers with fighters, and nukes, and chemical weapons, and all sorts of modern military equipment in the 1700's? As I seem to recall from history class both the military and the civilians had about the same kind of firepower back then. And if you think civilians can have the same kind of firepower as the military today, why can't I go down to my local gun store and buy a nuke?

[xShane]

Originally Posted by mrkramer

Who had aircraft carriers with fighters, and nukes, and chemical weapons, and all sorts of modern military equipment in the 1700's? As I seem to recall from history class both the military and the civilians had about the same kind of firepower back then. And if you think civilians can have the same kind of firepower as the military today, why can't I go down to my local gun store and buy a nuke?

This is a valid point I rarely see mentioned (of which I've long been aware of). The times when the Constitution was written and those famous quotes by Jefferson that are so commonly spread around were different times.

[Sydde]

Originally Posted by Spectrum Abuser

I'd recommend that anyone spouting information about the hypothetical actions of the US military read the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Specifically 892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION. An order to attack unarmed citizens would become unlawful and thus require a soldier to disobey.

The problem is that command is who decides how the squad/battalion/brigade should proceed. If the airbase commander tells the F-18 pilot to bomb 2745 N. Magnolia Ct. because a bad person lives there, how is the pilot to discern that the commander is deceiving him? Call up the house and have a talk with whoever lives there? A large portion of US military strength does not involve any F2F kind of action, it is lob bombs or cruise missiles at the people we want to take out. The judgement of the warrior counts for little if all they have to go by is some coördnates.