Gun Control: Why are so many politicians in Favor of Disarming the American Public?

Filed under Guns, Self Defense  
Posted by:

Leave a comment

Despite what the idiots in Washington would like the public to believe; guns save innocent people’s lives. I know this is an inconvenient truth for the morons who keep pushing their gun control agenda, but there’s an overwhelming amount of evidence to support these facts.

Over the last 20 years, the number of Americans carrying concealed weapons has been on the rise. While some in Washington predicted this would cause a spike in homicides, the actual numbers show something entirely different.

Gun Death Chart

But even if we take self-defense out of the equation; our founders added the second amendment, not to stop criminals, but instead as a way to stop a corrupt government from threatening the liberty of the American people. They knew it would be much harder for a corrupt government to impose their tyranny on a public that was well armed. Without guns, the public is defenseless from the corruption that eventually threatens every society. Our founders understood that, and they trusted the American Public with the responsibility of being armed.

James Madison put it this way in The Federalist Papers:

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

With overwhelming evidence pointing to the fact that guns help keep people safe, one really has to wonder why the federal government is now so afraid to trust the public. Why is it that they’re so interested in disarming law-abiding citizens? Is it ignorance; or is it something more sinister?

In 1942, after having occupied Russian territory, Adolf Hitler gave a speech where he said:

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”

I think that statement is actually very telling, and in my opinion is probably something that most of these anti-gun politicians would agree with. It seems they’re more interested in controlling the public than they are in protecting it. These people are so Anti-Gun that they would rather see law-abiding citizens become victims of crime than allow them to legally own a gun.

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Thomas Jefferson

But what about all the recent Gun Violence; shouldn’t we pass tougher gun laws to stop it?

CriminalIn my opinion, the anti-gun politicians are the ones that created these problems to begin with. They’ve created an environment where citizens are more fearful of the gun laws than they are of the criminals who are taking over the streets.

An example off this can be seen in cities like Chicago and New York, where the criminalization of gun ownership has caused the average law-abiding citizen to no longer be able to protect themselves, or their families from criminals. These two cities highlight how ineffective gun control laws actually are.

Chicago is one of the most anti-gun cities in America; yet throughout 2012, the city was averaging over 50 murders in a single weekend. If gun control really worked, wouldn’t these cities be virtually crime free?

Thomas Jefferson warned about this:

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

What about the Recent Mass Shootings.

Now this may shock and even upset some people, but in large part I believe these mass shootings are just a bunch of media hype.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not some delusional wacko who thinks these events never happened; I just believe the media makes these things into something they’re not.

Mass killings are not new, and they have nothing to do with guns.

Jack the Ripper, Ted buddy, Jeffrey Dahmer: all of these wacko’s committed brutal and horrific crimes, killing untold numbers of people. They also had something in common; they all killed people without guns.

The fact is, if people want to kill, they’re going to do it with or without guns. In fact, I would argue that guns are actually one of the worst ways to commit these mass killings.

If someone really wants to kill are large number of people, a mass shooting is about the least effective way to accomplish that goal. That’s why you rarely hear about terrorists walking into buildings and opening fire. The attacks on 9-11 and the Oklahoma City bombing are two examples of how passing gun control laws will not stop people from committing mass murder. You can’t legislate this problem away.

Gun Free Zone SignLet’s look a little closer at these recent mass shootings. In almost every case, these shooters targeted people in so-called “Gun Free Zones”. These are areas where carrying a gun is not allowed, but as we’ve pointed out many times in the past — criminals don’t really obey these laws do they?

Criminals, terrorists, and the mentally insane don’t care about Gun Laws. The very word criminal should give these idiot lawmakers a clue. If they obeyed the law, they wouldn’t be criminals.

Gun Free Zones, Gun Restrictions, and Gun Bans will never do anything to stop CRIMINALS from carrying guns. The only thing these laws do is ensure that good people will continue to be hurt because they can’t legally defend themselves from attack.

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” George Washington

Comments

Responses to " Gun Control: Why are so many politicians in Favor of Disarming the American Public? " Please share your thoughts...

  1. Gavin Brooks says:

    UK based. I agree and wish we have the right to defend ourselfs by any means necessary that includes hand guns and rifles. It is a pity that we have a government that is not only grey but is very blind to what should be our rights to self preservation. Did you know just to carry a small knife in your pocket can land you in jail! We are however allowed to carry a small pointless tactical torch to help temporarily blind a thug who is bent on killing you with their huge knife or baseball bat. Criminals have a right to maim or kill you yet the victim has no right to defend themself. Face it as its a fact here in UK.

    • paul says:

      if we illigize of guns then only criminals will have guns

      • Sue says:

        When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns!

      • louisq says:

        exactly , that already happen in Venezuela , Ecuador and south from our country in Mexico!!!

      • Chris says:

        Is that anything like making them illegal?

    • russ says:

      We know the govt. has people reading these type of sites.
      But, we must stand and stand now. Some may say they will just give their guns to the govt. Result- Register the Confiscate then Elimination!
      Either way, we may have to pay a price ot continue our freedom!!

    • freeman says:

      Hitler first took away the gun. Why do you need guns the government will protect you?

      • carl says:

        the government will not and can not protect you ! the reason the government wants to take all guns is so they can allow criminals more freedom and to protect themselves from the citizens !

    • freeman says:

      Hitler first took away the gun. Why do you need guns the government will protect you?

      • Monika says:

        what makes you think the government will save you? If they take the guns from us the criminals will still have theirs because they dont have papers for them. A criminal breaks into your home with a gun do you honestly think the government will be there to save you?
        we should have the right to bare arms to protect ourselves. I have alot more to say about the government so if you would like to contact me my email is above.

      • nope says:

        hitler did not take away the people’s guns.

        The Weinmar Republic did that, a “good” government, which set the table for an “evil” government to impose tyrannical rule.

        A perfectly good benign government can pass “gun control” only to have tyranny made easier down the road.

        Further, Hitler only imposed “gun control” on people he did not control, or people he wanted dead- undesirables, jews, gays, political foes. He did not disarm his police, his military, his SS, his SA, his …… you get the idea.

        When only the police and military have guns, ie people that the government controls, then you have tyranny.

        • carl says:

          1942 Adolf Hitler speech after conquering russian territories . the most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms – History shows that all conquerors that allowed subject races to carry arms prepared their own downfall by doing so . you need to take a better look at the history before you make unfounded statements !!

    • Erin says:

      WOW! I didnt realize you couldnt even carry a pocket knife. That is insanity, I feel totally naked and exposed on the rare occasion I dont have atleast a knife on me.

    • Frizz says:

      wtf doyou want? u live in a land of total harmonie and you ask me who is the bad boy???

    • Brenda says:

      Well said – criminals do not obey the law -any sign saying “gun free zone” is an advertisement for where a criminal would want to be so THEY don’t get shot – it’s like flashing a neon sign saying “smorgasbord for crime”.

  2. church says:

    the truth be told …..AMEN….

    • macadan says:

      I am a strong supporter of the second amendment, and legally carry a firearm everyday. To me the most important aspect of this debate is transparent truth and an unbiase display of facts. Unfortunately I find that often times offgrid survival seems to be inacurate and often times inconsistant even within their own fact statments. If Chicago were to average 50 homicides per weekend as stated above than that would take the anual cont for this one city to around 2500 homicides per year when in actuality the tally for 2012 was higher than previous years buttotaled less than 600.

      Lets keep facts facts….

      I am a father of four, a lifelong member of the NRA and feel that the constitution is the only legal document that we need to maintain a healty free America. I am also in strong belief that in order to win this battle we need to be as accurate as possible when stating facts as evidence, especialy due to the fact that the truth is on our side.

      • jkloop says:

        Since 1976, it’s been illegal in Washington, D.C. to own any handguns or to keep any type of gun in your home fully assembled. Nevertheless, Washington, D.C., has among the highest murder rates in the nation. gun control does the opposite of what its supposed to.

  3. SonOfSam says:

    There’s only three types of people in this world: bullies, victims and freemen. My weapons help me defend my freedom, my loved ones and my life; they help protect my status as a freeman.

    Bullies beware

  4. Henry says:

    The day the left takes down the second amendment will be the day America ends. We all need to stand at all cost to keep the second amendment.

    • DEB says:

      THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE DO NOT STAND TOGETHER AS ONE VOICE, JUST LOOK AT THE ELECTION OUTCOME.

      • John says:

        After Obama won his second election, in his inauguration speech he says we (America) will rise and fall as a nation. That statement there summarizes his intent on the direction of America, we’ve risen as a nation already. Next stop according to him is nowhere but the bottom.

        • rorak says:

          Theres two classes in this country the rich (2%) and the poor (98%) The only people the republicans care about are the 2% thy try to call them job creators, that’s true in China. The also receive more welfare than anyone else in the US, in the form of tax breaks and other loopholes they use to hide there money. If America falls it will have little to do with Obama

          • Greg says:

            rorak,
            You sir, are an idiot.

          • Alphamutt00 says:

            Rorak: Check your facts. Then take an English class or two. As for economics, spending is our problem. Not a few people hiding money. That is a Dem issue and you can look to the current administration (or lack of) on that one.

          • acard134 says:

            Corporate greed is a problem, but I agree with greg. You sir are an idiot! Obama has been in office for 1.7% of the life of our nation, but he has increased the National debt by 34% and counting!!Obamacare will quicken that pace. How can you possibly say he would have little to do with our downfall. HE IS THE REASON FOR OUR CURRENT DOWNFALL!!and quite frankly so are you sir!

          • SammColt45 says:

            First, take some grammar lessons. Second, take the time to proofread your writing to correct the errors you may actually know about. Third, you are badly mistaken about the 2%/98% rich/poor evaluation of our society. I am far from being rich, but I am just as far from being poor. I suspect I am like most Americans when it comes to financial status. I do agree that Obama will not be the cause of our downfall, but he is a symptom and a symbol of the already fallen state of America.

          • political majesty says:

            You all are idiots, i guess obama caused the 2008 financial meltdown, I guess BUSH had nothing to do with that. Bush spent more money from 2001 – 2005 then all the total presidents from washington to clinton. Before any of you idiots speak check the facts on this.

          • Erin says:

            The only people the Democrats care about it the rich as well. All welfare and government handouts are a control measure. Stay of the government tit and live free.

          • Brenda says:

            I will agree with and repeat Gregs post – you sir are an idiot – I was a Dem years ago, brought up in a fam of Dems. We are all Reps now, and some libertarians. We are not rich. We are down to earth country people who work hard for our daily bread. Washington is full of crooks looking to increase their fat wallets – and there are as many Dems there as Reps. And just who do you think is in the white house? Wow.

      • Monika says:

        Our votes dont really matter. The take a couple of people (high up people) from each state and their votes suply the outcome. Learned that in history class back in high school.

    • 1414er says:

      DEFINE “ASSAULT” weapon! Does that include my .38 revolver?
      How do we stand together Henry? If Obama signs executive order then how do we fight that – it’s federal? What will the outcome look like that should trigger Americans to gather/protest? Do we bring our unloaded weapons with us to make a point? hmmm scary thought. Sherry from AZ

      • Ed says:

        No, protest with LOADED firearms. Unloaded just makes it easier to disarm us.

      • Any law that violates a citizens constitutional right is illegal and grounds for impeachment and arrest or criminal inditement. Constitutional law protects the citizen from the probability of Tyranic dictator wanna-be’s.

        • William Freeman says:

          Well now, he signed 23 executive orders dealing with gun control today. I wonder if/when someone will bring up impeachment? Hasn’t he already violated the 1st amendment? We didn’t impeach him for that – I doubt our “leaders” will grow the balls to try to get it done because they are more worried about their political careers the “We the people”! But, if you think about it, the politician(s) that steps up to the plate would be more likely to get elected/re elected.

        • carl says:

          what we need is to impeach everyone in washington dc

      • Namvet says:

        Executive Orders are NOT law. As much as the anti’s want you to believe that. If an E.O. were a law, why have legislators? The HMCNIC could do what ever he damn well pleased, to include declaring himself DICK-TATOR for life.

        • me says:

          executive orders apply to federal branches of government, are federal in nature.

          You need to understand that Obama is taking away state power and enhancing federal power all the time to this end, so his executive orders have more power.

          Obamacare for instance would take away healh care powers from state and make them federal. Given that he has declared “guns” a HEALH problem all your (forced) taxes for health care can be used towards disarming you, and because health care is now FEDERAL and not state his executive orders on guns are all but laws.

    • gunrightsupporter4life says:

      They will have to pry my rifle and handgun from my cold dead hand before they get them and I hope there ready for a fight bc I will not give up willingly and I know of others who feel the same way we have already had one civil war there will be another and not against the north and south but civilians against goverment

  5. Mike says:

    Tougher gun laws will not stop the violence! In fact it will only result in an increase of other violent crimes. As already identified Chicago has seen an increase in violent crimes involving firearms, and is obvious that criminals will always find a way to obtain a gun regardless on enacted ‘laws’ and place law-abiding people in a position to become either an easy victim or criminals themselves in efforts to protect life and property.

    Now I do not know the circumstances around Jovan Belcher’s murder/suicide, but in regards to Bob Costas anti-gun pitch during Sunday’s game stating “both victims would be alive today if they didn’t have guns;” I am a firm believer that it was a sad event that had been contemplated prior to enactment and would have occurred by other means even if more restrictive gun laws were in effect. In fact I am aware of people that simply stopped watching the game in disgust of the inappropriate statement made in that forum.

    I do not own guns, but I believe they do serve a purpose as a deterrent against crime and corruption, including corrupt legislators with an ulterior motive, be that excessive control of the lemmings or an attempt to overturn current Constitutional “Rights.” Banning firearms only makes “the dictator” safer; even Stalin made the statement: “The only real power comes out of a long rifle.”

    • DEB says:

      MIKE, THANKS FOR HAVING SUCH AN OPEN MIND, FOR A NON GUN CARRING AMERICAN.

    • rahunter says:

      Good read, Mike. You speak facts.

  6. rev. dave says:

    I think it has very little to do with crime and self-defense. I believe it’s all about control, and leaving citizens with no way to oppose or control the ‘governing class’. Why else, throughout history, have governments either forcibly disarmed their populations, or made it illegal to own and carry weapons?

    Look here (http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm) and see how in the last century about 100 million people were first disarmed by their governments, and then murdered en masse by that same government. And it all starts with ‘registration’ of weapons, then confiscation, then killing those who had them.

    Politicians don’t want us armed because armed we are able to defend against them, or to hold them accountable with their lives for their activities against us.

    • DEB says:

      Dave i also think it has little to do with crime, on thier part, but it is the first step before the far far left can begain the next step to becoming a socialist country.

    • carl says:

      you stated that very correct . your right about that statement

  7. david says:

    I never heard of a bank robber say wait I cant use a gun those are illeagal!

    • weaponkid says:

      LOL

  8. Mike Bentley says:

    Right on! I’m a gun owner in a high theft area in rural Ohio. I even know the thieves, not as friends, but know who and where they are. Some have been jailed a couple of times and are out again, still thieving. But, they have never messed with me and I truly believe it’s because they know I’ll protect my family and my home with deadly force if and when the situation calls for it.
    Arm yourself and let it be known.

  9. Henry says:

    Remember what the second amendment says.

    “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

    This does mean we the people have the right to own semi auto guns.

    • Off Grid Survival says:

      Actually it’s exactly what it means!

      • church says:

        Henrey….we the people have the right to keep and bear arms …this being said there’s no recorded terms in the Constitution the type of arms be it a sword,knife,club,arrow,or auto loader…think of it this way the citizen has a autoloader what threat is it to the government official who carry a fully automatic weapon he still possesses greater fire power you’ve apparently never seen what a 50 caliber turent mounted machine gun can do an only the govt. is allow to have them..not even 20 people with semi autoloaders stands a chance….this is they’re excuse to ban all gun so the population can be controlled so the ruling class can take it all through out history the man with the biggest stick is in charge…..

        • church says:

          this is NOT about going up against the govt. it about being able to protect yourself and your family….if 20 people were coming to take your wife or mother away to linch her and they had single shot weapons ( maybe its your child they are after )would you want a singe shot gun or an autoloader now you decide……

          • church says:

            open up your mind an thing now what is the auto loader really for….your kids are hungry an you have that deer in your sites as you squeeze the trigger you miss you shot with the single shot your child goes to bed hungry with the autoloader theirs a chance he or she might eat ……

          • Henry says:

            church,

            I am a Cuban-American so I know a little about not having the right to bear arms and not just to protect your family and friend from crime. The second amendment does say “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state” which this does mean in plain English that the people to keep and bear arms.

            This is very clear. It is there to defend from a bad government that tries to control it’s people.

        • Erin says:

          There are very few in the Government that have the experience and control of a “Ma Duece”(50 cal) to be truelly deadly. And those few that have that experience and skill are generally the type to be fans of the 2nd Amendment. Well aimed shots win over spray and pray any day. Id take 20 semiautos with well aimed shots any day over a single 50.

    • Bravo six says:

      It means we have the right to own the same weapons carried by our federal and state militias…

  10. phoenixfly11 says:

    http://fox40.com/2012/12/05/trading-guns-for-turkeys/

    This is what they seem to be doing in Northern California, seems kind of random honestly. I’m not sure if the link will show up but my emailing application isn’t working.

  11. church says:

    a single thief will still..but it takes two thugs to plot a armed robbery one man is not brave enough to bust down your door with a weapon in hand to rob or rape or murder you there has always been bravery in numbers a single shot weapon is no good under this circumstance that’s one of the reason why man in vented the autoloader to protect himself from terrorist of all kinds…….

  12. Dennis says:

    Whenever any politician is attempting to bring up implementing gun control, always refer them to Kennesaw GA, Gun Town USA.
    http://www.wnd.com/2007/04/41196/

  13. Mike says:

    Rorak; take your tired 60s abbie hoffman retoric and head to one of the people’s paradises you probably admire. Cuba and Venezuela are looking for suckers….I mean workers. You could go to N Korea, I hear they need border guards to help keep all the people trying to break in since it is such a worker’s paradise.
    Stalin and Lenin had a term for dolts like you – usfull idiots.
    That 2% 98% is just pure, concentrated BS. This was a great country before the whiners and haters got in power. Yeah, the NEA and AFT unions did a great job over the last 40 years. We went from the #1 school system in the WORLD to 29th. And now they have the nerve to ask for more benefits and pay. For What? Graduating students that can’t read, don’t know geography, math, science or history? Less than 50% can be called functional. Marxist unions are runing this country. And fools like you march in lockstep. Go join Obaama’s civilian army, then you will be able to run one of the ovens.

  14. rkz777 says:

    It has nothing to do with safety, it has everything to do with control of the people, leaving them with no way to protect themselves, their families and their FREEDOM. These thugs want your weapons so that they can conquer you and America. Did you know that all of the countries that fought with us against the fascist and communist in the world have already been disarmed, we are the only armed people left in the FREE world. Once they have us then kiss your rights and FREEDOM away. Don’t do it. Why would someone want your weapons, when law abiding citizens don’t harm anyone with their guns, unless its to defend their lives and their families! Get your heads out of the muck and stand up for yourself, just as I and millions of others will do.

  15. JayofAllTrades says:

    People that want gun control, aside from the politicians, are likely people that have never owned or shot one. People fear what they don’t know. If you have never seen it, I advise people to watch part of a series called 30 Days by Morgan Spurlock. Yes, that guy. One episode shows an anti-gun lobbyist spending 30 days living with a very well armed family. She has never shot in her life, and has to undergo training, and work in a gun store. This just shows how much people fear guns, simply because of media hype, the bad press, and the ideas they have in their head. They have never had the training, never had a firearm, and it shows in how easily they jump to push gun laws. Education and training is key. If someone wants to take away our rights, they should be shown why we need them in the first place.

    • shynsly says:

      Thank you, very well said. I grew up on a farm in the rural midwest, I was taught proper and safe handling of firearms at a very young age and have been shooting most of my life. It is as much, more so I guess, a recreation/hobby as anything else.

      I joined the Army straight out of High School as a pretty niave kid, and had never really even thought much about guns as anything “evil” or “sinister”. But after I started to see how things were in other parts of the country, I was stunned by the baseless fear people have of them. It took me a long time to even conceptualize that most people in this day grow up in the city/urban areas, and thier only real exposure to guns is all the horror stories they hear about crimes, robberies, drive-by’s, etc., on the nightly news.

      It’s sad how many people truly hate guns or are deathly afraid of them without ever having even fired one. Many times in my life, I’ve gotten people like that to come shooting with me, and I’d guess 99% of the time, they’ve had fun, and even if not considered purchasing a gun for themselves, at least been forced to rethink the scary MONSTER that comes to mind when they envision a firearm.

  16. John says:

    It almost seems suspicious that they are pushing this so hard. I cannot help but wonder if handguns kill more people in a year than rifles do in 5 why the hard push to ban weapons that could let us do what the 2nd amendment lets us do: oppose threats to liberty?

  17. RT says:

    Look at the congressional approval rating (under 8%)and you’ll find the reason to take the guns!

    When the people fear the government, there is tyranny / When the government fear the People, there is LIBERTY!!!!!

    • acard134 says:

      here here!

    • DED says:

      RT for Pres.

  18. 1414er says:

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

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

    Very interesting definitions!

  19. Russ says:

    Why is it in all the talk about guns and shootings that no one mentions the fact that most of the shooters are on drugs or antidepressants prescribed by a shrink or MD. Shouldn’t we be going after the real problem?

  20. chris vaughn says:

    Hi,
    I received this from GOA (Gun Owners of America) today…seems there has been some backroom deals going on in the Senate that will change Senate rules in regards to the filibuster. The near term purpose if this goes thru would be to ram through Obama’s Anti Gun Bills…

    “Stop the U.S. Senate from greasing the skids for gun confiscation

    Reid & McConnell are reportedly about to change the Senate rules

    It’s probably a harbinger of sell-outs to come. But Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell is apparently about to conclude an agreement with Majority Leader Harry Reid which would sell out pro-gunners and decimate minority rights under the Senate rules.

    This change could occur as early as Wednesday. If enacted, it could handcuff pro-gun forces and keep them from defeating the most radical initiatives aimed at restricting our Second Amendment rights.

    The first of two changes would allow Harry Reid — and only Harry Reid — to circumvent the hurdles that the minority could use to slow down a controversial gun control bill.

    As you may remember from the fight over the anti-gun ObamaCare bill, the filibuster of the “motion to proceed” is the last point where pro-gunners can delay a bill before Harry Reid can bribe Senators and buy votes with deals like the infamous Cornhusker Kickback.

    If Reid follows this procedure, McConnell could offer two “germane” amendments on behalf of Republicans. But given the willingness of Democrats to destroy the Senate rules by brute force, you can expect them to drastically limit what amendments would be considered “germane,” thus restricting the ability of the minority to effectively filibuster an anti-gun bill.

    The second Reid-McConnell amendment would make it virtually impossible to stop a bill from going to House-Senate conference committee.

    Currently, if pro-gunners suspect that Democrats intend to take a tiny bill and write comprehensive gun control in a House-Senate conference, they can stop the bill from going to conference and require that it be bounced back-and-forth in an amendable form — what is known as ping-ponging — between the two houses.

    But this Reid-McConnell change would allow Reid to force a conference to prevent the minority from, once again, stopping gun control legislation from being written in a conference committee and crammed down Senators’ throats on a take-it-or-leave it basis.

    The bottom line? Given that Harry Reid has consistently abused the Senate rules and locked Republicans out of the amendment process, why should McConnell reward him with this massive expansion of his powers?

    And what does this say about the likelihood that McConnell will show any courage on the gun issue when it comes before the U.S. Senate?

    The President and his allies in the Congress want to impose Universal Background Checks, among other things, upon every gun purchaser in America. This would finally give gun grabbers the information they need to identify and register every gun buyer (whether the purchase was completed as a private sale or through a gun dealer).

    Given that the Democrats in New York are trying to CONFISCATE guns from law-abiding gun owners, gun owners should rise with ONE VOICE in opposing any legislation or rules changes that would allow federal bureaucrats to register gun owners.

    And more to the point, gun owners need to contact their Senators immediately and demand that they leave the Senate rules alone!

    At the rate that Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is going — if he concludes a deal limiting the use of the filibuster — it would not be surprising if a number of primary opponents emerge to challenge him.

    ACTION: Please contact your U.S. Senators immediately. While you can contact them here through CapWiz, we would strongly encourage you to call your Senators and DEMAND that they leave the filibuster alone!

    You can reach them by calling the U.S. Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121. And, please call Sen. Mitch McConnell (202-224-2541) and tell him to make NO DEALS to limit the use of the filibuster.”

  21. Watch out for the Gun Control Freaks says:

    Gun Grabbing is all part of the NWO. Having a defenseless populace just allows their dominance, of rape and pillaging of our country’s resources and treasury with little resistance. American’s need to know it will only take 3% of Patriotic and Dedicated Armed Americans to take our country back from the Politically Corrupt Traitors currently incharge of the Government and trashing the US Constitution. I can easily see public hangings comeback into fashion for these treasonous traitors.

  22. coyotedogg says:

    All part of the plan. Make health care unafordable jobs impossible to find.Food difficult to afford. Have as many young and healthy people as possible join the armed forces under the guise of patriotism. Enforce gun control to the point youl lgive them away for a meal ticket or a mcdonalds coupon. Inundate the media .Enter NWO.

  23. greyman says:

    Im not trying to be or sound like a conspiracy nut however we are all witnessing the truth and facts everyday in America. Allow me to make some obvious points that many are overlooking:
    - Other than what the public is told on media, why is the government so adamant in the act of removing defensive weapons from the public?
    - Why are the rich and powerful allowed to carry and or obtain security and protection? What and or why are they so different from all the rest of us the Citizens of the United States of America?
    - If defensive weapons are removed from citizens, do you think Bloomberg will lend you his security? Do you think such law will apply to him and others like him?
    - Why Monsanto or Seminis pushing the government to impose rulings on heirloom non GMO crop seeds? Why are crops with fertile seeds so hard to find?
    - Why are the seeds of life being regulated by big business and government?
    - Why are family farms being run out of business?
    - Too many to list but hopefully you get my point
    I will leave everyone with this statement that was made in the late 90′s. Take note and compare to what is happening now.
    “Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”
    Quote by Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberg meeting at Evian, France, May 21, 1992.

Tell us what you're thinking...