So now with the Elections over and Obama is president we should see before Valentine’s day a renewed interest in the “Assault weapons ban” . I use quotes because anyone with half a brain knows that “assault weapons” is fictitious if not oxymoronic term made up to frighten the small minded moon-bats. Small minded fearful ones aside lets think about what the ban is supposed to accomplish. As with all attacks on constitutionally protected rights, the reason is that this will somehow make our country safer, while only having to give up a little essential liberty. Legally owned rifles are somehow a serious and immediate threat to the safety of our children, as well as increasing crime in our cities. (All the little moon-bats say “amen” ) That would be great if it was true.
Both the FBI and Justice Departments freely acknowledge that the guns they call “assault weapons” are hardly ever used in crime, and the 10 Years of the Clinton Ban had no noticeable effect on crime rates so it was a failure of its stated purpose. Since children accidentally being injured by rifles is a very rare occurrence, there was no reduction in juries to children. And here we are about to ban even more guns under the same weak reasoning. It makes no sense unless…….
Consider that the Second Amendment exists to allow citizens to not only defend their home against a foreign invader but also against a government that was no longer “of the people, by the people and for the people” The hope was that the number of armed people would always outnumber a standing army by 4-1 and thus the second amendment was the final “check and balance” against a government takeover. As of today our military is outnumber by LEGALLY armed citizens by 40 to 1 overall and as much as 400-1 specifically. (I will explain the math another day). This means in an all out showdown between the citizens and the government, the citizens would emerge victorious unless our government took drastic steps such as nukes or death camps. If we accept this hypothetical revolution senario, what weapons currently available to the citizens would be the best choice for defending ones home and community against the troops of a rouge government? Why, could it be semi-automatic rifles with a removable magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds? The new “assault weapons” ban lists over 65 guns BY NAME that would all be considered excellent weapons to arm a citizen militia (which as we know is necessary for a free state).
This therefore leads me to two possible conclusions dear reader:
- That authors and supporters of the ban are insane and should be removed from office for theirs as well as our safety
- They are NOT insane, but rather skilled chess players and this is the subtle opening moves against the citizens as part of a larger play. Clown troupes like the Brady Center and VPC are bit players to be discarded when their use is complete,and the greater population of moon-bats and Sheeple are the pawns….in more ways than one.
Neither of these two options fills me with great confidence in the future. Mind you, I am willing to entertain other posibilities, but these are the only two that seem to make sence.
Because I realize these things now , they call me “Paranoid”……when these things start to come to pass they will instead call me “traitor”, but when the end of those times come, I will be remembered as “Patriot”
2alago 