The state and the powers that be benefit. It's so important for them to disarm the public because the public cannot then fight back as effectively against despotic control.
There's not really much to understand. If you are outnumbered and have a gun, and there are five other people that you want to take over, but they have guns too, then the easiest way to take them over is to take their guns away.
This is how three dudes can walk into a crowded bank and hold a hundred people up if they have guns.
That's the thing. Who's going to fight the citizens for the government?
I feel like gun control is just a result of extremely incompetent ignorant jackasses in power, but no one wants to accept how weak the system is and that there isn't some plot to disarm citizens for the sake of disarming.
Why would any soldier ever invade a citizens area?
The sad truth about this is that TPTB and the military industrial complex has made and trained soldiers specifically to be brainless, unquestioning, empty-shelled automatons that their superiors can fill with brainwashing propaganda so that the soldier can go fight and kill WHOEVER they say to.
The truth, of course, is that while there are indeed (and unfortunately) many soldiers that ARE basically automatons, many it seems are beginning to wake up. This is a good thing - a great thing actually - but there are still a lot of soldiers (again, unfortunately) that WILL indeed invade and attack their own citizens if this is what they are told to do by their superiors.
Most soldiers I know are for gun rights.
Yes, but TPTB are as intelligent and conniving as they are evil...and they are VEEERY evil...so it is not above them to stage false flag attacks that will make the public look like the enemy so that they can tell the soldiers "See? Look! The public is a hazard onto itself and cannot be trusted! We MUST confiscate all weapons! for the public's own good! Go to it, soldier!" and, again, many brainwashed young men and women will indeed go forward. I would certainly hope I'm very wrong in this, and I hope that if I'm NOT wrong, there are still a lot of other soldiers who ARE on our side and on the side of the 2nd amendment, and WILL protect the citizens...but I am not 100% certain of just which side the men and women of our armed forces will fall at this point.
And how many civilians with semi automatic rifles does it take to stop the marines if they want to get in your house?
That's not a bad question. The fact of the matter is that there are indeed more civilians than there are people in the armed forces. Those in the armed forces, however, ARE trained to fight and kill in a manner that most civilians are most definitely not. I would imagine that a fight between every person in the armed forces against every civilian would be up in the air in terms of who would possibly win because, although the "civis" vastly outnumber the armed forces, the armed forces are definitely more organized and trained for armed conflict and battle.
That being said, those men and women in armed forces have family members, and I don't think they would be willing to gun down their own loved ones...so things could ultimately get VERY complicated and sticky.
Ultimately, I would certainly hope that the armed forces are on the side of the civilians. I would hope that things DON'T get so out of hand that this kind of conflict doesn't take place, but...who knows...
Yeah, you're correct. I mean, the fundamental concept is that guns = force. And as a force, it changes the dynamic of any confrontation, realistically everything, in any situation/scenario.
Guns are weapons and weapons change the dynamics of how people act. Confiscation eliminates or diminishes the opposition's ability to do damage or resist.
I often ponder the same question. Only thing I can come up with is that "they" are aware of something we aren't. A game changer, if you will. Something big, like a sudden shift in resource availability. Something actually bigger than money. What could that be? No idea. I'm not even convinced that's what's going on. But the only thing an extreme capitalist puts before profit is their own survival.
Fossil Fuels. Research peak oil. We hit it in the 70's. It's why America occupies nearly every country on the planet. Most consumer products are packaged in fossil fuels, contain fossil fuels, it's how we heat our homes, transports goods, transport food. When there is no fuel to sustain the global economy it will be a short matter of time until local (meaning inner continent economies, not in the small sense) collapse. Academically it's referred to as the Collapse. Derrick Jensen's books Endgame Volumes 1 & 2 are a great place to start. Resource competition is what drives every species on the planet, we are no different. When we run out of fossil fuels and the vast majority sees how the Elite made no effort to protect us and have turned against us it will be a shit storm. It's also inevitable considering fossil fuels took billions of years to accumulate and we've been using them for less than 200 years.
First of all, realize that it's not JUST the government here. This has to do with a LOT more than just governmental control. This is a corporatocracy we live in 100% through and through. There may very well be yet other forces in control of things/the world than just the government and the corporations, but 1) these two entities are definitely big players in the global enslavement scheme and 2) the government alone is definitely not the only entity responsible here nor the most powerful entity by far. That being said, the little TPTB haven't already taken over of our lives, our funds, and of the possibility we still (barely) have of resistance to their quest for absolute power is something they want to clamp down upon even more.
Granted they are already very close to controlling us fully. Monetarily, they absolutely have us under lock and key. We are wage and tax slaves all the way. We provide them with trillions of dollars a year in wealth and power.
They just want more of it. Right now there is still a small chance that the public can fight back. They want to prevent even that.
I mean isn't the status quo pretty much desirable to the powers that be?
Not the one that presently exists. They have, I would say, about 75-85% control of the population. That's a whole heck of a lot, but not only are there various people that DO fight back, but the internet is beginning to open that percentage up even more...and they definitely don't want this. The status quo is pretty much already darn close to locked down in "Idiocracy"...but they want as much full lock down control of things as absolutely possible, and they don't have that as of yet here.
Rampant consumerism, a pacified, distracted, and (mostly) physically unfit population.
This is all absolutely true...but, again, TPTB want full control, and they don't have that yet. There are still some of us that are actively fighting to wake ourselves up and wake others up. They don't want any of that happening, and right now, there is still a possibility of that happening. They want to lock down on even that.
What more could they want?
Everything, my brother. Everything.
They don't have that yet, and they're trying.
This seems pretty ideal for the powers that be, especially given income inequality these days.
Nope. You are confused into thinking that the abject consumerism that you rightly point out and the extent of slavery that exists now (consciously and subconsciously) is AS BAD AS IT CAN GET.
It is not, my friend. Not yet.
They want all of it - ALL the power - and although they most definitely have most of it, it seems they are not interested in stopping until they can exist absolutely uncontested by any possible opposition that could arise against them.
Maybe its not about taking guns away, but about freaking people out that guns are going to to be stripped so they will settle on something less imposing. Its like selling a car. I want 3500 for it, but I list 5000. When they bring me down to 4000, I settle and both parties thought they won.
What would they do? I dont know. Maybe Higher security in Schools. Schools become the new airports. They are talking about demolishing or possibly renovating sandy hook. My guess is, they demolish the school and rebuild it with "New Security Standards". This will be the normal for ALL new schools and old schools may be required to retrofit in order to receive federal money. This is my best guess. Schools are the new airports.
And lets be real about this, anyone voting on this is probably already out of school and doesnt care, and anyone in school are too young to vote on it. LOL. suckers.
From what I've seen it's all related to the 2nd amendment in the U.S. Constitution. The arguments of pro-gun members revolve around the necessity and right to owning guns in order to prevent a government from going tyrannical, a fear that is very real for some.
"Who" would benefit? I suppose the generic ruling elites, the upper 1% who profit from all the chaos, as they tend to in most cases. I am not sure about other implications of gun control, nor am I entirely decided on the case, but I am definitely leaning in the favour of pro-gunners at the moment in light of all the very strange mass shootings recently...
EDIT: In short, if the Govt. wants a takeover, this is step one. This is all a summary, by the way.
I don't think the efforts on gun control is representative of an ultimate goal, it will just be another incremental step and a useful wedge issue. A distraction, really. Once the pressure creates some spark of violence against our "benefactors", that will be proof enough that that we will need the government to to take the appropriate steps.
More to the point will be the morphing of the country into a "needful" compartmentalized, gated community to combat the "dangerous" criminals; such a lock down will become necessary to protect us from increasingly more violent elements. It will all be for our safety and security, of course. What better way to unite people than to protect them from a threat within their own country?
Politicians benefit from looking like they care about people. They may, and some people do, believe that less guns = less death.
Also, gun manufacturers and sellers benefit from the scare of gun bannings because sales and prices skyrocket. If the bans are never passed, it's a huge win for them.
I think it's important to also understand that a lot of people around the globe are looking at the Americans. They have guns and so in theory it should be easier for them to oppose the government should they wake the fuck up and decide human kind had enough of banksters and their friends.
This is why it's very important. It only takes one spark to light the flame that will lead to these people getting hanged all over the globe so I guess they are trying to make sure that spark DOES NOT HAPPEN until they have enough drones and autonomous weapons to be able to obliterate everything and anyone in their destructive paths.
I don't hate Jews. I just want them to stop imposing Zionism on my country. Believe me, I am one of those peaceful, super-tolerant hippies the liberals try so hard keep in their tent. I'm not racist.
40 comments
10 no1113 2013-01-15
The state and the powers that be benefit. It's so important for them to disarm the public because the public cannot then fight back as effectively against despotic control.
There's not really much to understand. If you are outnumbered and have a gun, and there are five other people that you want to take over, but they have guns too, then the easiest way to take them over is to take their guns away.
This is how three dudes can walk into a crowded bank and hold a hundred people up if they have guns.
3 DAEfart 2013-01-15
Why would any soldier ever invade a citizens area? Most soldiers I know are for gun rights.
And how many civilians with semi automatic rifles does it take to stop the marines if they want to get in your house?
2 Flytape 2013-01-15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo
Katrina aftermath, it's already happened before.
2 [deleted] 2013-01-15
brainwashed "soldiers"
2 Multicrest 2013-01-15
A Marine carries out the order he is told.
1 AssCommander 2013-01-15
That's the thing. Who's going to fight the citizens for the government?
I feel like gun control is just a result of extremely incompetent ignorant jackasses in power, but no one wants to accept how weak the system is and that there isn't some plot to disarm citizens for the sake of disarming.
1 no1113 2013-01-15
The sad truth about this is that TPTB and the military industrial complex has made and trained soldiers specifically to be brainless, unquestioning, empty-shelled automatons that their superiors can fill with brainwashing propaganda so that the soldier can go fight and kill WHOEVER they say to.
The truth, of course, is that while there are indeed (and unfortunately) many soldiers that ARE basically automatons, many it seems are beginning to wake up. This is a good thing - a great thing actually - but there are still a lot of soldiers (again, unfortunately) that WILL indeed invade and attack their own citizens if this is what they are told to do by their superiors.
Yes, but TPTB are as intelligent and conniving as they are evil...and they are VEEERY evil...so it is not above them to stage false flag attacks that will make the public look like the enemy so that they can tell the soldiers "See? Look! The public is a hazard onto itself and cannot be trusted! We MUST confiscate all weapons! for the public's own good! Go to it, soldier!" and, again, many brainwashed young men and women will indeed go forward. I would certainly hope I'm very wrong in this, and I hope that if I'm NOT wrong, there are still a lot of other soldiers who ARE on our side and on the side of the 2nd amendment, and WILL protect the citizens...but I am not 100% certain of just which side the men and women of our armed forces will fall at this point.
That's not a bad question. The fact of the matter is that there are indeed more civilians than there are people in the armed forces. Those in the armed forces, however, ARE trained to fight and kill in a manner that most civilians are most definitely not. I would imagine that a fight between every person in the armed forces against every civilian would be up in the air in terms of who would possibly win because, although the "civis" vastly outnumber the armed forces, the armed forces are definitely more organized and trained for armed conflict and battle.
That being said, those men and women in armed forces have family members, and I don't think they would be willing to gun down their own loved ones...so things could ultimately get VERY complicated and sticky.
Ultimately, I would certainly hope that the armed forces are on the side of the civilians. I would hope that things DON'T get so out of hand that this kind of conflict doesn't take place, but...who knows...
2 tengajenga 2013-01-15
Yeah, you're correct. I mean, the fundamental concept is that guns = force. And as a force, it changes the dynamic of any confrontation, realistically everything, in any situation/scenario.
Guns are weapons and weapons change the dynamics of how people act. Confiscation eliminates or diminishes the opposition's ability to do damage or resist.
1 no1113 2013-01-15
There you go, my man. That is the basis of the entire dynamic in a once sentence nutshell right there.
2 [deleted] 2013-01-15
[deleted]
1 [deleted] 2013-01-15
I often ponder the same question. Only thing I can come up with is that "they" are aware of something we aren't. A game changer, if you will. Something big, like a sudden shift in resource availability. Something actually bigger than money. What could that be? No idea. I'm not even convinced that's what's going on. But the only thing an extreme capitalist puts before profit is their own survival.
Just a thought.
1 xDe4thic4x 2013-01-15
Fossil Fuels. Research peak oil. We hit it in the 70's. It's why America occupies nearly every country on the planet. Most consumer products are packaged in fossil fuels, contain fossil fuels, it's how we heat our homes, transports goods, transport food. When there is no fuel to sustain the global economy it will be a short matter of time until local (meaning inner continent economies, not in the small sense) collapse. Academically it's referred to as the Collapse. Derrick Jensen's books Endgame Volumes 1 & 2 are a great place to start. Resource competition is what drives every species on the planet, we are no different. When we run out of fossil fuels and the vast majority sees how the Elite made no effort to protect us and have turned against us it will be a shit storm. It's also inevitable considering fossil fuels took billions of years to accumulate and we've been using them for less than 200 years.
1 no1113 2013-01-15
First of all, realize that it's not JUST the government here. This has to do with a LOT more than just governmental control. This is a corporatocracy we live in 100% through and through. There may very well be yet other forces in control of things/the world than just the government and the corporations, but 1) these two entities are definitely big players in the global enslavement scheme and 2) the government alone is definitely not the only entity responsible here nor the most powerful entity by far. That being said, the little TPTB haven't already taken over of our lives, our funds, and of the possibility we still (barely) have of resistance to their quest for absolute power is something they want to clamp down upon even more.
Granted they are already very close to controlling us fully. Monetarily, they absolutely have us under lock and key. We are wage and tax slaves all the way. We provide them with trillions of dollars a year in wealth and power.
They just want more of it. Right now there is still a small chance that the public can fight back. They want to prevent even that.
Not the one that presently exists. They have, I would say, about 75-85% control of the population. That's a whole heck of a lot, but not only are there various people that DO fight back, but the internet is beginning to open that percentage up even more...and they definitely don't want this. The status quo is pretty much already darn close to locked down in "Idiocracy"...but they want as much full lock down control of things as absolutely possible, and they don't have that as of yet here.
This is all absolutely true...but, again, TPTB want full control, and they don't have that yet. There are still some of us that are actively fighting to wake ourselves up and wake others up. They don't want any of that happening, and right now, there is still a possibility of that happening. They want to lock down on even that.
Everything, my brother. Everything.
They don't have that yet, and they're trying.
Nope. You are confused into thinking that the abject consumerism that you rightly point out and the extent of slavery that exists now (consciously and subconsciously) is AS BAD AS IT CAN GET.
It is not, my friend. Not yet.
They want all of it - ALL the power - and although they most definitely have most of it, it seems they are not interested in stopping until they can exist absolutely uncontested by any possible opposition that could arise against them.
3 wasone 2013-01-15
As Mao stated, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."
3 Loco91 2013-01-15
yes, the constitutional law professor, who won't even override congress on the debt limit, is about to declare a police state.
-3 Loco91 2013-01-15
couldn't possibly have anything to do with, like, keeping children from getting shot...
3 Multicrest 2013-01-15
Maybe its not about taking guns away, but about freaking people out that guns are going to to be stripped so they will settle on something less imposing. Its like selling a car. I want 3500 for it, but I list 5000. When they bring me down to 4000, I settle and both parties thought they won.
What would they do? I dont know. Maybe Higher security in Schools. Schools become the new airports. They are talking about demolishing or possibly renovating sandy hook. My guess is, they demolish the school and rebuild it with "New Security Standards". This will be the normal for ALL new schools and old schools may be required to retrofit in order to receive federal money. This is my best guess. Schools are the new airports.
And lets be real about this, anyone voting on this is probably already out of school and doesnt care, and anyone in school are too young to vote on it. LOL. suckers.
2 DangerousMind 2013-01-15
From what I've seen it's all related to the 2nd amendment in the U.S. Constitution. The arguments of pro-gun members revolve around the necessity and right to owning guns in order to prevent a government from going tyrannical, a fear that is very real for some. "Who" would benefit? I suppose the generic ruling elites, the upper 1% who profit from all the chaos, as they tend to in most cases. I am not sure about other implications of gun control, nor am I entirely decided on the case, but I am definitely leaning in the favour of pro-gunners at the moment in light of all the very strange mass shootings recently... EDIT: In short, if the Govt. wants a takeover, this is step one. This is all a summary, by the way.
1 yahoo_network 2013-01-15
How do you respond to the ridicule that will ensue when you state your mistrust of the US government?
One really has to map the whole interaction out. Make it convincing.
2 Kuldebar 2013-01-15
I don't think the efforts on gun control is representative of an ultimate goal, it will just be another incremental step and a useful wedge issue. A distraction, really. Once the pressure creates some spark of violence against our "benefactors", that will be proof enough that that we will need the government to to take the appropriate steps.
More to the point will be the morphing of the country into a "needful" compartmentalized, gated community to combat the "dangerous" criminals; such a lock down will become necessary to protect us from increasingly more violent elements. It will all be for our safety and security, of course. What better way to unite people than to protect them from a threat within their own country?
2 iam_sancho2 2013-01-15
If you were a gang that knew of a house that had money in it, but the homeowners were armed...
1 [deleted] 2013-01-15
[deleted]
1 iam_sancho2 2013-01-15
Maybe the faction that supplied them and the Zetas with the guns fast and furiously.
1 Multicrest 2013-01-15
Right? Who in the gov't has the number to the cartels? I thought these two groups of humans don't really interact with each other.
1 iam_sancho2 2013-01-15
Not on paper they don't.
1 DAEfart 2013-01-15
Politicians benefit from looking like they care about people. They may, and some people do, believe that less guns = less death.
Also, gun manufacturers and sellers benefit from the scare of gun bannings because sales and prices skyrocket. If the bans are never passed, it's a huge win for them.
1 21007 2013-01-15
why dont you ask teh coutnries who have been overtaken by tyranny, oh wait, you can't. They aren't allowed to use reddit
1 kraeken0 2013-01-15
Criminals first and always.
1 droneone 2013-01-15
I think it's important to also understand that a lot of people around the globe are looking at the Americans. They have guns and so in theory it should be easier for them to oppose the government should they wake the fuck up and decide human kind had enough of banksters and their friends.
This is why it's very important. It only takes one spark to light the flame that will lead to these people getting hanged all over the globe so I guess they are trying to make sure that spark DOES NOT HAPPEN until they have enough drones and autonomous weapons to be able to obliterate everything and anyone in their destructive paths.
-2 haveyouconsideredthe 2013-01-15
Other americans.
-3 john_madden_advice 2013-01-15
These guys.
0 Yossarian4242 2013-01-15
You're seriously blaming the Jews for this?
1 john_madden_advice 2013-01-15
What do you want me to do? Blame an innocent party?
3 BilderbergAgent 2013-01-15
That's exactly what you're doing now, so yes.
2 Yossarian4242 2013-01-15
Glad to see you're living up to "hates Jews" tag I gave you.
-1 john_madden_advice 2013-01-15
I don't hate Jews. I just want them to stop imposing Zionism on my country. Believe me, I am one of those peaceful, super-tolerant hippies the liberals try so hard keep in their tent. I'm not racist.
0 Yossarian4242 2013-01-15
You don't hate Jews, you just think that they are all out to steal your guns?
1 john_madden_advice 2013-01-15
Just the ones in government and media.
0 Multicrest 2013-01-15
Actually, its Palestine that wants to disarm us. I think its cuz we voted against them to have them recognized. -Da Rabbi
-4 Girfuy 2013-01-15
Americans would benefit from it.
Shame most of you are short-sighted gun nuts, too busy harping on about the second amendment to see this.
-5 cancerbotX 2013-01-15
This post is fucking lame.
1 Multicrest 2013-01-15
Right? Who in the gov't has the number to the cartels? I thought these two groups of humans don't really interact with each other.