About the author: Steve Sheldon

Steve Sheldon is a lifelong outdoorsman, hunter, gun-rights enthusiast and widely published author. Steve spent a dozen years in private industry as an investment broker and owner of multiple businesses. He served the National Rifle Association almost ten years in various capacities before moving to Americans for Prosperity in his current role of External Affairs Officer. Steve has held various church leadership roles over the years and served in a jail ministry.

View all articles by Steve Sheldon
  • jeepdude911

    Never think it can’t happen here.

    • Braden Lynch

      Who would have thought we could simply round up Japanese-Americans on the west coast at the start of WWII and ship them off to camps without any charges?

      No evidence of subversion, no charges, no legal recourse. I now wonder what it would have been like if they had shot back in great numbers. Then the benevolent government would have the false “reason” to attack them.

      They trusted the government and while they were not slaughtered, they certainly had their rights, property, and dignity all trampled due to the internment. It could have gone the other way and just have them starved if say Hawaii had been taken.

      Never, ever surrender your weapons. They are the only things that might deter an evil government in the future. Resist registration that often leads to confiscation.

      • Sue

        Why only mention Japanese Americans? There were “camps” here for German and Italian Americans too. They are not mentioned because it makes us look bad. German POW’s were kept in camps here long after the war was over.

        • Michial Lawrence

          Sue, you must have fallen asleep during your history class. Mr. Lynch is refering to the civilian Japanese-Americans, not the Japanese POWS. The Italian-American and German-American civilians were not put into internment camps as the Japanese-Americans were. I know this for a fact, because my mother and her relatives were German-American. They were not forced into internment camps. You need to first read the true history of that time before you start spouting off about it.

          • The Blue Collar Man

            She can’t read about it. I think that was part of History that was replaced with glorification of “an other” religion.

      • MR.RIGHT

        This will just make criminals out of ‘law abiding citizens’ because criminals ‘DON’T GO BY THE LAW’!!!!!!!!! and I think we already have registration of guns when you purchase them, don’t we? So as for more registration and or fingerprinting? I guess that makes every American that owns a gun a criminal in the eye’s of this regime. They finger print you when you get arrested, you get hand cuffed when you’re arrested, but they say “you’re innocent until proven guilty.” but really you’re guilty until you can prove your innocence! Can you smell it? I can; and it smells like tyranny!

        • dextermassolettisr

          You are right Right, but just one thing:
          Resistration is not a national thing except for machine guns &c; many places have no recogniion OR records of ownership — as for the law(s), there are probably much more than 20,000 laws and regulations if you include manufacture, sale and documentation.
          Legalism and Statism give power to the real criminals.

  • Carl Stevenson

    Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, Holder, and their whole gang are tyrant wannabes. To them, anyone who does, or might, oppose their control over every aspect of our lives, is “a criminal” because they said so.

    To quote a few of their heroes, with explanatory comments in ( ):

    “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” – Mao
    (They revere Mao and the way he ruthlessly grabbed power in China. The fact that he murderd about 100 million Chinese to do it is, to them, a “feature,” not a “bug.”)

    “If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves. … The only real power comes out of a long rifle. … Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach. … We don’t let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns? … The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.” — Joseph Stalin

    “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 the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty.” — Adolf Hitler
    (These psychopathic sociopaths in our government – and THEY ARE PRECISELY THAT, never make the mistake of doubting it – believe that they are anointed to be our rulers and that we are the equivalent of Hitler’s “subject races.”)

    THOSE are the reasons why, and the sort of people who want to, disarm us.

    These same people through DHS and other alphabet agencies have recently purchased over 1.5 BILLION rounds of ammo – enough to shoot every man, woman, and child in the country 3-4 times – ammo that’s illegal for military use under international law. Considering that you and I and all of the other US taxpayers are paying for all of this ammo, it’s frighteningly reminiscent of the story of political prisoners’ families being forced to pay for the bullets used to execute them … isn’t it?

    If we allow these leftist control freaks to ignore and ultimately gut the 2nd Amendment, history will inevitably repeat itself. These “gun control” proposals have NOTHING to do with preventing crime, but EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL.

    Hitler disarmed the Jews and others, then murdered about 15 million.
    Stalin disarmed the Russians, them murdered about 40 million.
    Mao disarmed the Chinese peasants, then murdered nearly 100 million.
    The Turks disarmed the Armenians, then murdered 1.5-2 million.
    Pol Pot disarmed the Cambodians and murdered millions.
    Rwanda disarmed its ethnic groups, then murdered millions.
    The list goes on … over 170 million people murdered BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS in the 20th century – AFTER they allowed those governments disarmed them.

    They ALL thought “It can’t happen here” – until they were disarmed and it started, then it was too late. Don’t make the same mistake. Don’t EVER let your government disarm you.

    The Founders knew that government, if not constrained at every step, will continue to accumulate power and control until it becomes tyranny. That’s why they feared standing armies and insisted that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    “Never forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn’t let him do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians.” – Aaron Zelman

    • http://www.facebook.com/jim.dewulf Jim DeWulf

      Right On Carl, you have done your homework!! We need to get the message out NOW!

      • Jeff

        There will be a lot of blood shed, we must stand for our constitution and get this country back to the way it was founded. And that is getting rid of our current so called leaders!

        • LASERSHOT1

          How do you orchestrate that?? Start where?? If “they” come down your street, who do you shoot? They are innocent until they set fire to or blow up your house. A little late then. The cancer is already spreading faster than you think. The muslim POTUS is allowing the muslims into our country unleashed while everyone thinks the Mexicans are the enemy. The POTUS mom and dad hated America, his grandma hated America, he associates with violent people who hate America. He was mentored for eight years by a card carrying hardcore communist. HOW MUCH DO YOU NEED????

          • rivahmitch

            You ask ” If “they” come down your street, who do you shoot? They are innocent until they set fire to or blow up your house”

            First off, “innocent” is a concept which applies to a legal system which is rapidly losing any claim to respect.It’s irrelevant in a survival or other situation when one is under attack. If you’re looking for a corrupt legal system to protect your individual rights, you’re dreaming. Remember also that it has no “legal obligation” to do so under its own corrupt rules. If you’re willing to consider a mob headed for your home “innocent” feel free to enjoy your impending dhimmitude.

            As to your question “who do you shoot”, my answer is the first ones to come in range on my property and as many thereafter as possible until I go down. Semper Fi!

          • a_goodtarheel1

            Amen! And take away 30 round clips or mags? Hell no! I someone comes in my house with a 10 round clip, I need a 30 round clip. I love this long overdue discussion.

          • MR.RIGHT

            Right on the money, you shoot anyone that comes close enough to do you or your family any harm, as long as you have breath in your body; then its up to your other family members to do the same!

          • Uncle Sam’s Misguided Child

            As General Patton said it is not our job to die for our country but our job to make the other guy die for his. Fight until your family is safely away then attack to the rear. Then you use gerrilla war fair. We could not win against the British in a stand up fight. We won when we used indian tactics.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-Williams/100000740775101 Dan Williams

            Same here. I will be in the trees and moving.

          • BigJohn

            They are not innocent. They work against the Constitution of the USA. All firearms laws are unconstitutional! Do not wait until “they” come to your house. Go to their house first!

          • Coltanaconda

            Absolutely, I will not go quietly.

          • http://www.facebook.com/ed.abraham.3 Ed Abraham

            You don’t wate for them to come down the street. You get involved now!

          • rivahmitch

            Ed, I’ve attended local party meetings, mass meetings, etc. as well as speaking regularly at local government (supervisors) meetings and TP meetings I’ve voted in primaries and elections and contributed a significant portion of my retirement income to candidates and causes. I’ve also been a poll watcher at local polling places. It’s all been largely negated by voter fraud, stuffed ballot boxes, and questionable counting in jurisdictions controlled by political machines. My conclusion is that they’re going to come down that street irrespective of what I personally do. My responsibility is to determine my actions when they do. Just what involvement is it that you feel people should have at this stage beyond preparation?

          • Brassy

            I disagree, whatever agency that tries to enforce an illegal ban is not “innocent” when they come down your street armed. Take the appropriate response. If everyone in your neighborhood or town responded the same way, how effective do you think the disarmament could be.

          • David F. Podesta

            #1- if they’re coming down the street, they aren’t innocent. #2- do what they did in the Revolution – first warn them off, tell them what they’re doing is illegal, then, if that was unsuccessful, shoot the highest ranking officers, then the ones with the most dangerous weapons, and keep saying they’re committing a crime and you are defending yourself.

      • lasershot1

        Message out to WHOM??? The libtards are in charge. The muslim makes his own rules wipes his @ss with the constitution. So you get the word out and who will answer?? The sheeple?

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000158922556 Chris Stoneking

          Every time they enact another freedom-stealing law, thetre are more of us and less of them.

    • Sue

      Of the leaders you mentioned, Hitler did not disarm his own people. Our leaders are not for Americans they obey an alien lobby.

      • Daniel F. Melton

        Half truth. Here’s the full story:
        Restrictions imposed by the treaty of Versailles

        In 1919 and 1920, to stabilize the country and in part to comply with the Treaty of Versailles, the German Weimar government
        passed very strict gun ownership restrictions. Article 169 of the
        Treaty of Versailles stated, “Within two months from the coming into
        force of the present Treaty, German arms, munitions, and war material,
        including anti-aircraft material, existing in Germany in excess of the
        quantities allowed, must be surrendered to the Governments of the
        Principal Allied and Associated Powers to be destroyed or rendered
        useless.”[1]

        In 1919, the German government passed the Regulations on Weapons Ownership, which declared that “all firearms, as well as all kinds of firearms ammunition, are to be surrendered immediately.”[2]
        Under the regulations, anyone found in possession of a firearm or
        ammunition was subject to five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 100,000
        marks.

        On August 7, 1920, the German government enacted a second gun-regulation law called the Law on the Disarmament of the People. It put into effect the provisions of the Versailles Treaty in regard to the limit on military-type weapons.

        In 1928, the German government enacted the Law on Firearms and Ammunition.
        This law relaxed gun restrictions and put into effect a strict firearm
        licensing scheme. Under this scheme, Germans could possess firearms, but
        they were required to have separate permits to do the following: own or
        sell firearms, carry firearms (including handguns), manufacture
        firearms, and professionally deal in firearms and ammunition. This law
        explicitly revoked the 1919 Regulations on Weapons Ownership, which had banned all firearms possession.

        Stephen Halbrook writes about the German gun restriction laws in the
        1919-1928 period, “Within a decade, Germany had gone from a brutal
        firearms seizure policy which, in times of unrest, entailed selective
        yet immediate execution for mere possession of a firearm, to a modern,
        comprehensive gun control law.”[3]

        The 1938 German Weapons Act

        The 1938 German Weapons Act, the precursor of the current
        weapons law, superseded the 1928 law. As under the 1928 law, citizens
        were required to have a permit to carry a firearm and a separate permit
        to acquire a firearm. Furthermore, the law restricted ownership of
        firearms to “…persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who
        can show a need for a (gun) permit.” Under the new law:

        Gun restriction laws applied only to handguns, not to long guns or
        ammunition. Writes Prof. Bernard Harcourt of the University of Chicago,
        “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer
        of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition.”[4]

        The groups of people who were exempt from the acquisition permit
        requirement expanded. Holders of annual hunting permits, government
        workers, and NSDAP party members were no longer subject to gun ownership
        restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central
        government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted.[5]

        The age at which persons could own guns was lowered from 20 to 18.[5]

        The firearms carry permit was valid for three years instead of one year.[5]

        Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or dealing of firearms and ammunition.[6]

        Under both the 1928 and 1938 acts, gun manufacturers and dealers were
        required to maintain records with information about who purchased guns
        and the guns’ serial numbers. These records were to be delivered to a
        police authority for inspection at the end of each year.

        On November 11, 1938, the Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, passed Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.[7]

        • Sue

          Show me where Hitler imposed gun restrictions. What you’ve written is about the treaty of Versailles which was imposed upon Germany. The original comment was the confiscation of citizens guns. Hitler did not take arms away from German citizens. No half truth.

          • Dave

            Show us in the treaty where the Jews were restricted from firearms ownership. The Jews were citizens of Germany, it was Hitler who imposed gun restrictions on Jews and other “undesirables”. Hitler did confiscate their guns and anything else he could get his hands on. Guess where a lot of these people ended up. In 1932 the German gov’t announced that it would no longer adhere to the Treaty of Versailles, it had in fact, been violating the treaty since 1919. I agree with Huapakechi, your post contained half of the truth.

          • MR.RIGHT

            Hey stupid, yes you dave “If people don’t remember the past; their bound to repeat it.”

          • Dave

            Other than you think I’m stupid, what is your point?

          • Dave

            Emotionally unstable people like yourself, are why the left is having so many successes. You have a bad habit of running your mouth before engaging your brain, if indeed you have a brain cell in your thick skull.

          • David F. Podesta

            I believe the laws that ban gun ownership by Jews were enacted in 1935 – the same laws that said Jews couldn’t marry non-Jews, Off the top of my head, I’m thinking The Nuremberg Laws.

          • Daniel F. Melton

            Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany in 1933. Everything after that date had his full approval.

            http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/679048/posts

            The Night of the Broken Glass (Kristallnacht)Ðthe infamous Nazi rampage against Germany’s JewsÐtook place in November 1938. It was preceded by the confiscation of firearms from the Jewish victims. On Nov. 8, The New York Times reported from Berlin, “Berlin Police Head Announces ‘Disarming’ of Jews,” explaining:
            After invading, Nazis used pre-war lists of gun owners to confiscate firearms and many gun owners simply disappeared. Following confiscation, the Nazis were free to wreak their evil on the disarmed populace, such as on these helpless Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto.
            “The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been ‘disarmed’ with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.”2
            On the evening of Nov. 9, Adolph Hitler, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels and other Nazi chiefs planned the attack. Orders went out to Nazi security forces: “All Jewish stores are to be destroyed immediately . Jewish synagogues are to be set on fire . The Führer wishes that the police does not intervene. All Jews are to be disarmed. In the event of resistance they are to be shot immediately.”3
            All hell broke loose on Nov. 10: “Nazis Smash, Loot and Burn Jewish Shops and Temples,” a headline read. “One of the first legal measures issued was an order by Heinrich Himmler, commander of all German police, forbidding Jews to possess any weapons whatever and imposing a penalty of twenty years confinement in a concentration camp upon every Jew found in possession of a weapon hereafter.”4 Thousands of Jews were taken away.
            Searches of Jewish homes were calculated to seize firearms and assets and to arrest adult males. The American Consulate in Stuttgart was flooded with Jews begging for visas: “Men in whose homes old, rusty revolvers had been found during the last few days cried aloud that they did not dare ever again return to their places of residence or business. In fact, it was a mass of seething, panic-stricken humanity.”5
            Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed 6 million Jews. It was self-evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin.
            Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
            Other European countries also had laws requiring police records to be kept on persons who possessed firearms. When the Nazis took over Czechoslovakia and Poland in 1939, it was a simple matter to identify gun owners. Many of them disappeared in the middle of the night along with political opponents.

      • covert1968

        I have weapons, ammunition, explosives and body armor ! Bring it on ! , I use the same metaphor I did when in the Army; One shot one kill, mainly head shots from a long distance away !

    • a_goodtarheel1

      You are so right. I made the statement at a recent Pachyderm meeting that I believe that the gov will implement a sort of “census” for every firearm. My close friends, whom I have know for years, looked at me as if I had 3 eyes. This administration will come up with some kind of contrivance where they claim that for our safety, they need an accounting of every firearm. Well recently I read the bill that Diane Feinstein intends to introduce in the next session…and guess what it in there! We have to contact our state reps and senate members and tell them if they support this, we will support their opponent in the next primary, even if they have voted our way on every other issue. Thank you again for your post.

    • Arizona_Don

      I do “not disagree” with you analogy Carl however, I would like to over simplify it if I may. Anyone who proclaims to be liberal progressive has to believe completely in what you have said here. Because, if they did not they could not be liberal progressive or support Barack Obama’s administration or his desire to destroy the constitution and way of life many of my patriot friends have fought and died for. Therefore, it should be quite easy to point them out if the time ever comes we actually need to. I also fought, luckily I am still alive. I have said for some time now if we do get into a civil revolutionary war (I pray we do not, but we may be left no choice) uniforms may not be needed. Of course some innocents will become collateral damage and that is very sad. However, if you and others have not seen the following video’s you must avail yourself to watch. In the video you will get some idea of where Obama’s policies are taking us. Make no mistake this “is” his direction. He may smile and act like he has everyone’s welfare in mind but nothing could be farther from the truth. Because of liberal progressive support for Obama’s destructive policies they are and will remain the danger within this administration. All the dictators you mentioned here got into a position of power proclaiming their desire to help or secure the people. When however, they attained the desired power that all changed.

      In the final analogy however we must, absolutely MUST, never give up our weapons! They are the only current adhesive keeping this nation from slipping into the abyss of a socialistic dictatorship. Many of those who currently support the policies of Barack Obama may very well pay the supreme price for their lack of knowledge.

      All patriots must stay the course for future generations just as our forefathers did. Furthermore, we must bring God back into our nation.

      The following is for all. However, anyone who has not seen the last one Innocence betrayed please watch it now. It is important to understand gun control and this will explain what the people should really fear.
       

      Obama’s civilian security force
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_272656

      Types of Government
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

      Does it start with free speech or actually confiscation of the guns?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=7SGWH3kirzg&vq=medium

      Innocence betrayed.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDivHkQ2GSg&feature=youtu.be

      • MR.RIGHT

        Hey did anyone see his speech on “new gun control laws coming”? even the fat ass women that was standing behind him smirked when he talked about “spending cuts and no spending cuts” in the same breath. She smirked as though to think ‘do these idiots watching really believe this crap?’ Just my interpretation of the look on her face.

    • MR.RIGHT

      So true and they will have us digging our own grave too!

    • Jaime Cancio

      Actual figures suggest he killed in excess of 130,000,000 defenless people…one of Mao’s favorite tricks/tools was killing off the record keepers so no records kept. One time killing people who could read; another time killing off people who could not read.

    • 820 REDHORSE

      Great post Carl !!!! Wish it was on the front page of every fishwrap in America! Maybe it would wake some sheeple up!

    • LLinLa

      Excellent information, Carl!

    • Cincitiger

      Hitler and Stalin also disarmed their victims before committing mass murder and starving millions of people. Obama, Clinton, FeinSwine and Holder are progressive just like Hitler and Stalin, the only difference is that they imposed their progressive agenda at a faster pace than FDR and Woodrow Wilson did.

      • maybetoday777

        you mean they are all Roman Catholics just like Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Franco, Mussolini. This who you should be on the lookout for. Stop watching the tv.

        • Marc

          Stalin was Georgian Orthodox and Lenin Russian Orthodox, not exactly Catholics…

    • maybetoday777

      its called binding the strong man…so his house can be spoiled

  • MATTHEW

    WHOA! OBAMA WOULD NEVER DO THAT! HE SAID HE WOULDNT! WHOA!

  • marcdepiolenc

    These arguments actually provide support for the straw man – the “naive friend.” Eliminate private gun sales? How, exactly? And tell me how the 3-D printers are going to be rounded up…

  • Dwightmannn

    Start charging elected idiots, (and anyone else) that want to delete our constitutions 2nd amendment with TREASON. Think that might stop this insidious movement. If that dont, I know what will. . .

    • RPforPrez

      great idea, how do suggest we do that?

      • Daniel F. Melton

        “Unintended Consequences”

        • Carl Stevenson

          Great book! Out of print, but a diligent web search will let you find a .pdf

          • Daniel F. Melton

            Lots of interesting information in that book.

        • Juan Motie
          • Daniel F. Melton

            Thank you. I already have this.

    • Daniel F. Melton

      If the legal system refuses to prosecute (in fact it’s complicit) treason, the citizens must remove the offenders by the most expeditious means necessary.

    • covert1968

      Charge the President first and then the leadership of the House and Senate separately beginning with the current leaders of the 112th Congress and then the new leaders of the 113th Congress and if obtained and these people taken before a grand Jury and charged according to law with Sedition and Treason and indicted then arrested and charged then there would be a belief among the Leaders that we are not playing ! It would take a force of 150,000 former military members formed to make this point and this would outnumber the Sec. Svc. and FBI, Capital Police and NSA. The current military would just turn around and ignore the despot who calls himself a president and CIC ! This is fact as he wants to gut the military and they will follow the Generals and superior Officers who are Service Members themselves and want to keep their jobs !

  • becky21k

    They will never be able to ban guns, because criminals don’t obey laws, and if the neighbor rats them out they’ll probably shoot that neighbor first. I would.

  • NoMoreMarxistsInDC

    Startling evidence suggests that the U.S. Gun Control Act of 1968 was lifted, almost in its entirety, from Nazi legislation.

    Original article appeared in Guns and Ammo Magazine May 1993:

    “Are you tired of being told that “gun control” is a chronic pain that
    you have to accept because there’s no cure? Do you — a law abiding person —
    want to be free: to own whichever firearms you want to own, regardless of where
    in America
    you live; from waiting periods, gun bans, magazine capacity restrictions, etc.;
    to spend your time on the range or in the field, rather than fighting “gun
    control”?

    Are you tired of giving hard earned bucks to efforts that have at best only slowed
    the gun grabbers’ push toward firearms registration and confiscation? If you
    have had enough of death by a thousand cuts, you are ready to take action to
    wipe out “gun control” — now.”

    Members of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) consider
    “gun control” to be an aggressive cancer. JPFO has a cure, a way to
    destroy “gun control”. JPFO has hard evidence that shows that the
    Nazi Weapons Law (March 18, 1938) is the source of the U.S Gun Control Act of
    1968 (GCA ’68). Adolph Hitler signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The Gestapo (Nazi
    National Secret Police) enforced it. In “Gun Control”: Gateway to
    Tyranny we present the official German text of the Nazi Weapons Law and a
    side-by-side translation into English. Even more deadly: a side-by-side,
    section-by-section comparison of the GCA ’68 with the Nazi Weapons Law. If you
    have this in your hands, no one can tell you that you’re imagining things.

    The clincher: JPFO knows who implanted into American law cancerous ideas from
    the Nazi Weapons Law.

    The likely culprit is a former senator, now deceased. We have documentary proof
    — see below — that he had the original text of the Nazi Weapons Law in his
    possession 4 months before the bill that became GCA ’68 was signed into law.

    This former senator was a senior member of the U.S.
    team that helped to prosecute Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg, Germany,
    in 1945-46. That is probably where he found out about the Nazi Weapons Law. He
    may have gotten a copy of it then, or at a later date. We cannot imagine why
    any U.S.
    lawmaker would own original texts of Nazi laws. To find out his name, read on.

    With this hard evidence in your hands and in your head, you can destroy
    cancerous “gun control”. You can challenge anyone who backs “gun
    control”. You can show them the Nazi ideas, line by line.

    The parallels between the Nazi law and GCA ’68 will leap at you from the page.
    For example, law abiding firearm owners in Illinois, Massachusetts and New Jersey must carry identification cards based on formats from the Nazi Weapons Law. Nazi based laws have no place in America.

    Thousands of Americans died or were wounded in the war to wipe out the Nazis.
    They did not suffer or die so that Hitler’s ideas could live on in America and
    kill more Americans. Remember Killeen, Texas! The 23 who died in Luby’s
    Cafeteria there died because they obeyed Nazi inspired “gun control”
    laws. The law forced them, unarmed, to face an armed madman. Or, what about Waco, Texas, where government criminals used assault weapons and tanks to kill 80 innocent people (including 21 children) because their religious and political views differed from the U.S. Government. (Jews political and religious views differed from the Nazis too).

    To destroy “gun control” before more law abiding Americans are murdered by criminals, government criminals, or madmen helped by “gun control”, you need to
    get hold of the evidence as presented in “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny. You can then challenge the media, the most aggressive backers of “gun control”. Ask media personalities in your city or town why they back Nazi based laws. You can help to erase “gun control”, Hitler’s last legacy.

    GCA ’68 puts your life at risk right now. You have a constitutional civil right
    to be armed in order to protect yourself, because under U.S law the police have
    no duty to protect the average person:

    “There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state (or Federal) against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents against such predators but it does not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or, we suppose, any other provision of the Constitution. The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: it tells the state (gov’t) to let people alone; it does not require the federal government or the state to provide services, even so elementary a service as maintaining law and order”

    (Bowers v. DeVito, U.S., Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 686F.2d 616
    [1982]).

    See also U.S. Supreme Court cases of Will v. Michigan State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989) and DeShaney v. Winnebago County Board of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) (State has no duty to protect its citizens from each other).

    The Supreme Court last dealt with this issue in 1856; the 1982 decision states the position in modern language. The laws of virtually every state parallel federal law (see JPFO Special Report “Dial 911 and Die!” covered in Guns & Ammo, July 1992). This has been so ever since the Constitution was adopted in 1791. As a result, the framers of the Second Amendment deliberately created (guaranteed) an individual civil right to be armed. It is your only reliable defense against criminals. GCA ’68 ties your hands and keeps you from carrying out your legal duty to ensure your own self defense. GCA ’68 thus undermines a pillar of U.S. law and helps criminals to kill law abiding Americans. Hitler would be pleased.

    Thus, GCA ’68 marked a new approach to “gun control”. It replaced the
    Federal Firearms Act (June 30, 1938), which was based on the federal power to
    regulate interstate commerce. The 1938 law required firearms dealers to get a
    federal license (which then cost $1). Only dealers could ship firearms across
    state lines. Ordinary people could receive shipments from dealers.

    In GCA ’68 the government required that in almost all cases only dealers could
    send and receive firearms across state lines. This ended “mail order”
    sales of firearms by law abiding persons who are not licensed dealers. GCA ’68
    hits you even harder. Congress gave federal bureaucrats in Washington D.C.,
    the power to decide what kinds of firearms you can own. The framers of GCA ’68
    borrowed an idea — that certain firearms are “hunting weapons” — from the Nazi Weapons Law (Section 21 and Section 32 of the Regulations, page 61 and page 73, respectively, of “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny).

    The equivalent U.S. term, “sporting purpose,” was used to classify firearms. But it was
    not defined anywhere in GCA ’68. Thus, bureaucrats were empowered to ban whole
    classes of firearms. They have, in fact, done so.

    We wanted to know the source of these new ideas. On reading “Dial 911 and
    Die!” a JPFO member told us he had seen an article — by Alan Stang in
    ‘Review of the News,’ October 4, 1967 (pages 15-20) — the author of which felt
    that the Nazi Weapons Law was the model for GCA ’68. We found the article. But
    Stang did not reproduce the Nazi law, so we could not check his conclusions.

    We started to hunt for the text of the Nazi Weapons Law. We eventually found
    it, in the law library of an Ivy League university.

    Until 1943-44, the German government published its laws and regulations in the
    ‘Reichsgesetzblatt,’ roughly the equivalent of the U.S. Federal Register.
    Carefully shelved by law librarians, the 1938 issues of this German government
    publication had gathered a lot of dust. In the ‘Reichsgesetzblatt’ issue for
    the week of March 21, 1938, was the official text of the Weapons Law (March 18,
    1938). It gave Hitler’s Nazi party a stranglehold on the Germans, many of whom
    did not support the Nazis. We found that the Nazis did not invent “gun
    control” in Germany.

    The Nazis inherited gun control and then perfected it: they invented handgun
    control.

    The Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 replaced a Law on Firearms and Ammunition of April
    13, 1928. The 1928 law was enacted by a center-right, freely elected German
    government that wanted to curb “gang activity,” violent street fights
    between Nazi party and Communist party thugs. All firearm owners and their
    firearms had to be registered. Sound familiar? “Gun control” did not
    save democracy in Germany. It helped to make sure that the toughest criminals, the Nazis, prevailed.

    The Nazis inherited lists of firearm owners and their firearms when they
    ‘lawfully’ took over in March 1933. The Nazis used these inherited registration
    lists to seize privately held firearms from persons who were not
    “reliable.” Knowing exactly who owned which firearms, the Nazis had
    only to revoke the annual ownership permits or decline to renew them.

    In 1938, five years after taking power, the Nazis enhanced the 1928 law. The
    Nazi Weapons Law introduced handgun control. Firearms ownership was restricted
    to Nazi party members and other “reliable” people.

    The 1938 Nazi law barred Jews from businesses involving firearms. On November
    10. 1938 — one day after the Nazi party terror squads (the SS) savaged
    thousands of Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses throughout Germany — new
    regulations under the Weapons Law specifically barred Jews from owning any
    weapons, even clubs or knives.

    Given the parallels between the Nazi Weapons Law and the GCA ’68, we concluded
    that the framers of the GCA ’68 — lacking any basis in American law to sharply
    cut back the civil rights of law abiding Americans — drew on the Nazi Weapons
    Law of 1938.

    Finding the Nazi Weapons Law whetted our appetite. We wanted to know who
    implanted this Nazi cancer in America. We began by probing the backgrounds of lawmakers who championed “gun control”. We focused on those whose bills became part of GCA ’68. GCA ’68 as enacted closely tracks proposals dating to August 1963. We felt that if the culprit were a lawmaker — or a congressional staffer — he or she would know Germany, German law and possibly even speak German. He or she probably would have spent time in Germany on business or during military service. Alternatively, if the culprit were not a member of Congress or a staffer, there would be testimony at the hearings to that effect.

    Most potential suspects were quickly eliminated; they had no apparent ties to Germany. But one lawmaker caught our attention.

    An old “Who’s Who” entry showed he had been a senior member of the U.S. team that prosecuted German war criminals at Nuremberg in 1945-46. Thus, he had lived in Germany just after the Nazi period. His official duties required him to look at Nazi
    records, including Nazi laws. In 1963 he led the effort to greatly expand the
    Federal Firearms Act of 1938.

    We then got a break. We told a legal scholar of our findings. He was intrigued.
    He sent us an extract from the record of hearings held a few months prior to
    the enactment of GCA ’68. At the end of June 1968, the Senate Judiciary
    Subcommittee to investigate Juvenile Delinquency — chaired by Thomas J. Dodd
    (D-CT) — held hearings on bills: (1) “To Require the Registration of
    Firearms” (S.3604). (2) “To Disarm Lawless Persons” (S.3634) and
    (3) “To Provide for the Establishment of a National Firearms
    Registry” (S.3637), among others.

    U.S. Representative John Dingell (D-MI) testified at these Senate hearings on
    “gun control”. Senator Joseph D. Tydings (D-MD) chaired some of these
    hearings, in Dodd’s absence.

    Rep. Dingell expressed concern that if firearms registration were required, it
    might lead to confiscation of firearms, as had happened in Nazi Germany.
    Tydings angrily accused Rep. Dingell of using “scare tactics”:

    “Are you inferring that our system here, gun registration or licensing,
    would in any way be comparable to the Nazi regime in Germany, where they had a
    secret police, and a complete takeover?”

    Rep. Dingell backed away.

    (Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the
    Committee on the Judiciary, 90th Congress, 2nd Session, June 26, 27 and 28 and
    July 8, 9 and 10. 1968, pp. 479-80, 505-6 cited as Subcommittee Hearings.)

    Tydings later inserted into the hearing record various documents,
    “concerning the history of Nazism and gun confiscation.”

    Exhibit No. 62 (see reproduction) is fascinating. This letter — dated July 12,
    1968 — is to Subcommittee Chairman Dodd from Lewis C. Coffin, Law Librarian at
    the Library of Congress. Coffin wrote:

    ” … we are enclosing herewith a translation of the Law on Weapons of
    March 18, 1938, prepared by Dr. William Solyom-Fekete of [the European Law
    Division -- ed.] as well as the Xerox of the original German text which you
    supplied” (Subcommittee Hearings, p. 489, emphasis added).

    This letter makes it public knowledge that at the end of June 1968 — 4 months
    before GCA ’68 was enacted — Senator Thomas J. Dodd, now deceased, personally
    owned a copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law.

    Why did Dodd own the original German text of any Nazi law? Why did he make
    known that he owned it?

    The Library of Congress then had (and still has) the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’ in its
    collection. The Library of Congress translator, Dr. Solyom-Fekete, could easily
    have used the Library of Congress’ own copy.

    Any member of Congress who wanted to read the Nazi Weapons Law need only have
    asked for it to be produced from the shelves of the Library of Congress and for
    it to be translated by Library of Congress experts. Why should any member of
    Congress ever have owned the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law?

    Without access to Tom Dodd’s personal papers, archived under his heirs’
    control, we unfortunately cannot offer definite answers.

    Dodd could have acquired the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during his
    time at Nuremberg. But he had no need to do so.

    Dodd did not personally handle the prosecution of Nazi Interior Minister
    Wilhelm Frick, who signed the Nazi Weapons Law. The case against Frick was
    presented by Robert M.W. Kempner, Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States
    (see ’Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military
    Tribunal,’ cited as TMWC, Vol. V, pp. 352-67, Nuremberg, Germany, 1947).

    Nor should the Nazi Weapons Law otherwise have come to Dodd’s attention. The
    Nazi Weapons Law was not used as evidence against Frick (see Kempner’s speech,
    TMWC, V, pp. 352-67 and ‘Index of Laws, Decrees, Orders, Directives, and the
    Administration of Justice in Nazi Germany and Nazi Dominated Countries’, TMWC,
    Vol. XXIII, pp. 430-33). The Nazi Weapons Law is not listed among documents
    submitted as evidence to the Tribunal by the American prosecutors (see Vol.
    XXIV, pp. 98-169).

    The prosecutors at Nuremberg doubtless knew of the Nazi Weapons Law. They probably saw it in the ’Reichsgesetzblatt.’ On the same day that Nazi Interior Minister Frick signed the Weapons Law, March 18, 1938, he signed another law governing security measures in newly annexed Austria. This law concerning Austria appeared in the ‘Reichsgesetzblatt’ — directly in front of the Weapons Law — and was introduced into evidence at Nuremberg (’Reichsgesetzblatt’ 1938, I, p. 262; the Nazi Weapons Law was published in the same volume, p. 265; see TMWC, Vol. V, p.358 for reference to law concerning Austria).

    Thus, the Nazi Weapons Law appeared to have no historical merit at Nuremberg and should not have attracted anyone’s notice, certainly not to the extent of causing anyone to want to keep a copy of it as a separate document.

    If Dodd got his copy of the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law during
    his time at Nuremberg, it likely was part of a collection of documents, for
    example, issues of the ’Reichsgesetzblatt’.

    But if he acquired the original German text of the Nazi Weapons Law after his
    service at Nuremberg, he must have done so for a very specific reason. The Nazi Weapons Law plainly did not figure at Nuremberg.

    We may safely conclude it had little, if any, interest for those interested in
    the history of the Nazis’ rise to power. For example, the Nazi Weapons Law is
    not mentioned at all in William L. Shirer’s very thorough study of Nazi
    Germany, ’The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’ (Simon and Schuster, New York,
    1950).

    At the hearings held by Dodd’s subcommittee at the end of June 1968, Rep.
    Dingell had objected to the firearms registration provision then being
    discussed. Dodd may have offered his copy of the Nazi Weapons Law to show that
    the specific proposal did not resemble anything in the Nazi law.

    He may not have realized that he was revealing a broader truth; that the whole
    fabric of GCA ’68 was based on the Nazi Weapons Law, even if the specific
    registration proposal was not so based.

    Alternatively, Dodd may not have cared whether or not anyone knew that he had
    the German text of the Nazi Weapons Law. He doubtless knew that months would
    pass before the hearing record was printed and so generally available for
    scrutiny. Thus, even if anyone then noticed the parallels between the two laws,
    the bill would already have become law.

    Rep. Dingell does not appear to have pursued the matter: the firearms
    registration provision was not included in GCA ’68. The Congress was stampeded
    on “gun control” by public enthusiasm. Martin Luther King had been
    murdered on April 4, 1968, and Robert F. Kennedy had been murdered on June 6,
    1968.

    We are not the first to have seen this hearing record. But we appear to be the
    first to have recognized its importance. This hearing record suggests strongly
    that the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT) himself implanted the Nazi Weapons
    Law into American law, or, at very least, helped others to do so.

    Now you know the ugly truth about the roots of GCA ’68. But you need to see —
    with your own eyes — the hard evidence of the Nazi roots of “gun
    control” in America presented in “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny.

    If you want to destroy “gun control”, you can use this book to do it.

    The Nazi Weapons Law of March 18, 1938, cleared the way for World War II and
    Nazi genocide against the Jews, Gypsies and 7,000,000 other people.

    The 1938 Nazi Weapons Law that disarmed, enslaved & murdered the men above,
    is alive and well in the United States, and is called, “The Gun Control
    act of 1968″, and is enforced by the modern day Gestapo, known as the
    “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).”

    • Dusterdog

      This guy must be retired

      • Lartho

        No, but he just learned to copy & paste, good grief!

    • Carl Stevenson

      Very well done. I have been spreading this around as well. jpfo.org has a lot of good info on this and other aspects of the racist and tyrannical roots of gun control, as well as the genocides that have inevitably resulted.

  • poptoy1949

    Come Holy Hell or High Water they will never take my guns. And that is my position. Period.

  • slickzip

    Any socialist/communist/liberal who wants my guns will have to kill me after I run out of ammo.

  • GWY

    There are NO good gun control laws and NO constitutional gun control laws. The laws we should see enforced are criminal control and elimination laws. Our legislators, law enforcement, and court systems seem to forget they are here to serve the people and not the criminals.

    • covert1968

      Collect the criminals with all of the Police and federal agents, as they far outnumber the real criminals and take them to trial and then imprison, execute the murderers or rapists and we would not have any problems and as felonious criminals these people have NO Constitutional Rights !

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PEU4YJIHPGSW3CFWZ5UAHPZUKU Darrell B

    The NRA is the first line of defense, along with GOA; NSSF, and you state rifle association. JOIN, and get in the fight!!!

    • Carl Stevenson

      On the efficacy of passive resistance in the face of the collectivist beast. . .
      Had the Japanese got as far as India, Gandhi’s theories of “passive resistance” would have floated down the Ganges River with his bayoneted, beheaded carcass. — Mike Vanderboegh.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/UMFVIDMIXXFFGFFQ7HKVSCLOV4 billybob

    After reading this B S story I’m going to buy a gun today.

  • Patrick Henry
    • Carl Stevenson

      I’m a life member of NRA, GOA, and JPFO. NRA needs to be more “no compromise” with our rights, like GOA and JPFO.
      We all need to write/call them and tell them to grow a pair.

  • $6078343

    Control pro-government lunatics, not firearms.

    • papabstr@aol.com

      You may have to use firearms to control them.

  • oldfatguy

    According to the CDC, there are about 10,000 gun-related murders per year, and so we MUST ban guns–for “the children”. Well, there are also about 17,000 deaths from AIDS every year, too. What shall we ban to save “the children” from THAT threat?

  • larrygrant876

    These democrats of today are Godless and so they don’t think there is anyone higher than themselves and so they must control our every move and thought, which by the way shows the high cost of Godlessness as we observe these morons attempt at logical solutions. They literally cannot make rational decisions. They are born stupid and raised in stupidity all the while grinning and winking like they are the sane ones. They would much rather make sure the poor misunderstood criminal has the advantage. Gun control is affirmative action for criminals so they can get a little better chance to be successful over their victims.

  • Joebigjoe

    Sorry, I’m not buying it.
    Where is the part where the good guys start to go after the liberals to the point where they beg the government to stop. If this all happens and its Ok for the liberal pukes to get off scott free while we get disarmed and put into camps, then tell me where to hand my guns in today.
    I predict a short Civil war before this would happen. Short because there arent enough police, military and government agents that would go along with any government gun grab for any length of time.

  • Joebigjoe

    Oh yeah I dont mean liberal politicians as much as I mean the liberal gun grabber up the street and liberals in our neighborhoods. Once people start going after them, they’ll want guns very quickly, and then the govt loses support.

    • Carl Stevenson

      What’s the difference? The up the street guy is just a useful idiot.

      Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, Holder, and their whole gang are tyrant wannabes. To them, anyone who does, or might, oppose their control over every aspect of our lives, is “a criminal” because they said so.

      To quote a few of their heroes, with explanatory comments in ( ):

      “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” – Mao
      (They revere Mao and the way he ruthlessly grabbed power in China. The fact that he murderd about 100 million Chinese to do it is, to them, a “feature,” not a “bug.”)

      “If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves. … The only real power comes out of a long rifle. … Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach. … We don’t let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns? … The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.” — Joseph Stalin

      “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 the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty.” — Adolf Hitler
      (These psychopathic sociopaths in our government – and THEY ARE PRECISELY THAT, never make the mistake of doubting it – believe that they are anointed to be our rulers and that we are the equivalent of Hitler’s “subject races.”)

      THOSE are the reasons why, and the sort of people who want to, disarm us.

      These same people through DHS and other alphabet agencies have recently purchased over 1.5 BILLION rounds of ammo – enough to shoot every man, woman, and child in the country 3-4 times – ammo that’s illegal for military use under international law. Considering that you and I and all of the other US taxpayers are paying for all of this ammo, it’s frighteningly reminiscent of the story of political prisoners’ families being forced to pay for the bullets used to execute them … isn’t it?

      If we allow these leftist control freaks to ignore and ultimately gut the 2nd Amendment, history will inevitably repeat itself. These “gun control” proposals have NOTHING to do with preventing crime, but EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL.

      Hitler disarmed the Jews and others, then murdered about 15 million.
      Stalin disarmed the Russians, them murdered about 40 million.
      Mao disarmed the Chinese peasants, then murdered nearly 100 million.
      The Turks disarmed the Armenians, then murdered 1.5-2 million.
      Pol Pot disarmed the Cambodians and murdered millions.
      Rwanda disarmed its ethnic groups, then murdered millions.
      The list goes on … over 170 million people murdered BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS in the 20th century – AFTER they allowed those governments disarmed them.

      They ALL thought “It can’t happen here” – until they were disarmed and it started, then it was too late. Don’t make the same mistake. Don’t EVER let your government disarm you.

      The Founders knew that government, if not constrained at every step, will continue to accumulate power and control until it becomes tyranny. That’s why they feared standing armies and insisted that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

      “Never forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn’t let him do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians.” – Aaron Zelman

  • Tom T

    All I have to say is “twenty minutes”. This is the response time of the local police to get to Sandy Hook. The supreme court has ruled many times that the police have not responsibility to protect you. They are however, there to fill out paperwork after the crime is committed. My father is a retired detective who says that 98% of the time they protect no one as they always show up after the crime is over to draw the chalk line around the body.

  • marineh2ominer

    The gun running scam run out of the White House and AG’s office failed even after many deaths , including some of our own good agents , because it was discovered and expose to the public as the scam it was to force more restrictive gun laws on us . It’s failure however prompted the government massacres in Aurora Colorado and Sandy Hook Connecticut , how do we know they were government operations ? Because in both atrocities there were originally reported more than one shooter in addition to the wingnut located and set up by the feds , yet in neither case was an issue made of the ghostly disappearance of said secondary shooters , BECAUSE THEY WERE THE INSTIGATING GOVERNMENT AGENTS . Think I am a conspiracy nut ? What about the twenty or thirty year CIA conspiracy that put Obamass in the White House even though he is an illegal alien . This has become an open secret now but is determined to be irrelevant because the people ” like him ” . Certainly not any of the SANE people .

    • Carl Stevenson

      It’s only a conspiracy theory if it’s not true ..

  • Centurian

    Steve, you got step 4 wrong. They don’t (and didn’t) wait for a horrible tragedy. They create them. Is there any part of Sandy Hook, Aurora or Columbine that doesn’t stink of false flag?

  • Lartho

    Oddly, there is a flaw right out of the gate in step #1. The liberal media has pilloried police forces for years, siding with the criminal whenever halfway possible (unless the person is a white, European male, that is!). They detest the military, as well. What they REALLY want is a nationalized “security” force to oversee all the sheeple, with, of course, obamao and his cronies as security chieftans.

    • Carl Stevenson

      You’re talking about Obama’s private army … That “domestic security force, as well funded and well armed as our military.” He’s been working on that …
      DHS and other alphabet agencies have recently purchased over 1.5 BILLION rounds of ammo – enough to shoot every man, woman, and child in the country 3-4 times – ammo that’s illegal for military use under international law. Considering that you and I and all of the other US taxpayers are paying for all of this ammo, it’s frighteningly reminiscent of the story of political prisoners’ families being forced to pay for the bullets used to execute them … isn’t it?

      If we allow these leftist control freaks to ignore and ultimately gut the 2nd Amendment, history will inevitably repeat itself. These “gun control” proposals have NOTHING to do with preventing crime, but EVERYTHING to do with CONTROL.

      • Lartho

        Sadly, they have made most of these inroads while maintaining a VERY small core base. The majority of those who voted for the communist from parts unknown simply don’t know anything about his/their true ideology. My shop is inner-city Alabama. 70% of my customers are black. Of those I’ve spoken to re. politics, only ONE out of over a hundred was a die-hard liberal. The others were FAAAAAR more aligned with Conservative principles. When I pointed that out, most were quite surprised. I’ve even managed to win a few converts along the way. We (Conservatives) are doing a miserable job of getting our mssg. out. Granted, people without cable get their news from the msm jerks, so that makes it all the more difficult.

        http://www.southernshade.weebly.com

  • Thorshammer

    Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. My firearms will not be taken or surrendered willingly. And to anyone that might consider the attempt to try, please reconsider your actions, as my thoughts and actions are not so much dictated by my need to retain my freedoms as to retain them for all others. I pledged once to defend my country in Southeast Asia and this time I’am pledging to defend it here in my own country. If you think that your political leaders operate with your best interests in mind you truly are delusional. The powers that be want to control all people and people with freedoms and firearms will get in the way of their plans. If my blood must be spilled to defend life the way our founding Fathers sought to make, it then so be it.

    • Daniel F. Melton

      Back when I was a teenager, my government put a uniform on me, put a rifle in my hands and ordered me to shoot communists. Who would have thought I could be shooting communists in my own government, here?

  • gypsy314

    I say lets turn this about doing away with gun free zones that kill our children and us.

  • dammit

    Confiscate the government for they are the true assault weapons…..

  • TexasJester

    Sandy Hook, Batman theater, etc, are all definitely tragedies, to the families and communities, don’t think I’m taking anything from that – but they are not NATIONAL NEWS tragedies. Just acouple days ago, there was a bus crash in Oregon – made INTERNATIONAL news. Why? Police chases in Los Angeles get primary air time on national news. Why? Don’t chases happen in other small towns? A private plane ith a few people on board crashes in the middle of nowhere, and they spend DAYS speculating on it, why?

    Things -often tragic events – happen in communities all over the country. Why do some make national news – for days or weeks – and others don’t? Perhaps the ones that don’t, don’t support the socialist government stance?

  • 2War Abn Vet

    No single gun law, and we have over 20,000 of them, has ever stopped a criminal intent on causing havoc. Passing additional laws will only serve to disarm honest people. Nothing government does will have any effect whatever on criminals.

    Law-abiding people use guns to defend themselves between two and two and a half million times each year.Denied a means of self-defense they would add massive numbers to the crime rate.

    • Larry Hughes

      And that bothers them HOW?

  • victoryman

    Step #2 is straight out of hitler’s playbook of the 1930’s.

  • machodog

    Law enforcement and military…I’d like to issue you a statement.

    If and when you think that you will come to our doors to confiscate our guns, that your families and loved ones are also in our midst. Caught between us and you.

    You swore to uphold the Constitution and protect us against “foreign and domestic enemies”. Gun confiscation is definitely against our Constitution and our domestic enemy is our own government hell bent on disarming us.

    I’ll turn my guns over to you when you stop carrying a weapon in the course of your duties.
    The best thing for you to do is refuse orders to confiscate.

    Obama is president in name only. He is not a legal, legitimate ‘president’. He is an illegal, narcissistic, alien who’s aim is to destroy us. You’d be helping him.

  • TimAZ

    Attempting to demonize guns and gun owners hasn’t work. I give you the record guns and ammo sales since Baraca Claus’ first election and the even greater increase since his re-election. Another factor would be that the citizenry knows about the governments purchase of enough ammunition to carry out a seven to ten year war against its own citizens. Gun sales and ammunition sales over the last four years and counting have only increased in volume. The American citizens are not going to be out outdone by a govt. that it supposed to derive its power from the American citizens. Lastly. Recent polling shows that most Americans have a favorable opinion of the NRA. Another indicator of failure of the govt. trying to influence the citizenry to ignore their best self interests in favor of enslavement to government.

  • krell51

    The government is granted powers under the Constitution, when they violate or ignore that Constitution, when they step out from under its umbrella they have no more authority than any common street thug. True they have more force of arms in isolated instances but not to the combined force of the American people, when they attack one of us they attack all.

    • 1_Eddie_1

      We the people grant the government powers. The Constitution is a chain upon the government by outlining what it cannot do.

  • CompassRose

    DO NOT COMPLY! I don’t ask the government for their permission, nor do I accept their authority over my right to arm myself. If nothing gets turned in; well, they’ll know where they stand.

  • baby tiger

    Some facts that the press completely overlooks.
    1. Obama is not black. His father was part black and part arab. His mother was white.
    2. All his know associates before he was elected to the senate and even later were anarchists with dreams of bringing down the American way of life.
    3. His transparency of office is comparable to a raging river at flood state. Completely void of any clarity.
    4. He was elected by unions and welfare recipients and not by hard working people like most of us.

  • CG

    While the article is very well written, I think the will and courage of the American people is not fully respected. An extremely large sector of our citizenry will not give up their firearms without a fight. States, like Texas, Montana, and many others, with rich histories in the cause of liberty, will secede from the union. Constitutionalists from all over the country will flock to those states or regions. Then what? The government sends the armed forces into a state that “declared it’s independence?” Then too, what armed forces would they send? In one survey, service members were asked if they would honor “unlawful orders” requiring them to go door to door and disarm America. Nearly 80% said they would not follow such an order, and many said they would leave the military (AWOL) to defend their families at home. So, who then takes the firearms? I’m doubtful that law enforcement would get involved in other than the most liberal states. The liberals are not armed. They will hope that others will do the fighting for them. I think they’d be damn well surprised!

    • Medic01

      “I’m doubtful that law enforcement would get involved…” Our sheriff has already announced that anyone who tries to confiscate firearms in his jurisdiction will do jail time as violators of the US Constitution. And I have pledged my service to him. And if he assigns me a firearm, I will use it when necessary.

    • Medic01

      “I’m doubtful that law enforcement would get involved…” Our sheriff has already announced that anyone who tries to confiscate firearms in his jurisdiction will do jail time as violators of the US Constitution. And I have pledged my service to him. And if he assigns me a firearm, I will use it when necessary.

  • CG

    Hitler never broke any laws.

  • Jamestown Patriot

    One of the simplest ways to “disarm” American citizens is to require them to register in order to buy ammunition of any kind. That way, they know your name, location, and type of gun you probably have. Then, all they have to do is have all ammunition removed from public sale, and then come and get your gun.

  • CarolParks

    General opinion seems to be that the mass shooters are ‘mentally ill’. Logic would suggest that the outcry should be against allowing mental illness to go untreated!

  • Ron

    One of those 10 should have included a ban on making/selling ammunition.

  • MR.RIGHT

    Here’s one my 11 year old daughter came up with “If guns kill people and the NRA is nothing but and bunch of killers, than the guy that came up with ‘texting’ is the one whom is killing people that text and drive.” Yes I am very proud of her, and I would add this to her statement; its the food industries fault your fat, not yours, the car industries fault you got in an accident not yours, its the beer/alcohol companies fault you were drinking and driving, not yours, its the parents fault kids turn out to be, homicidal killers, homosexuals, and baby murderers/abortionists! certainly not the school systems that they are taught in that have them in their power 81/2 hours 5 days a week. and certainly not that they have all but banned ‘God’ from every aspect of public life. You see, you didn’t do that, no not you, its not your fault?

  • got243kids

    We are not just defending against tragedy… we are defending against atrocity plain and simple.

  • CG

    From a prior service member; (I have deleted his name.)

    “I served my country, fought my wars, no, their wars. I got out and immediately went to work, started and raised a family, bought a house, paid my taxes and never broke any laws. I became a good neighbor, I was domesticated, a productive part of society doing what every good American is expected to do, pull their own weight and not sponge off the government. But now we have traitors within our own government working overtime to destroy this country from the inside out. But that very same government has forgotten what they’ve trained me and many more like me to do, swore me and many more like me to do, and that’s protect our country from them. And that’s exactly what I intend to do, to use those skills and honor my oath to defend my country, the people of my country, against all enemies foreign and “DOMESTIC!!!”…so help me God!!!!”

    • MyronJPoltroonian

      “C.G.”, I too swore the very same oath as you, served my country honorably, and have lived my life as an American citizen. Our sworn oath, if memory serves, had no expiration date, nor, I suspect, would we recognize one even if it was suddenly “Reinterpreted” in some afore to previously “Undiscovered Penumbra”. Remember this: “Always aim just below the blue helmet, no matter what color it is.”

      • CG

        I didn’t mean to give the impression that I was the author of the comment, though my feelings are precisely the same. I quoted it, but wasn’t comfortable with posting the author.

        I retired from the Army. The oath, once taken, is lifelong, and I’ll honor it ’til I’m in the ground. Well said, Myron. Hundreds of thousands of service men and women have died and been maimed honoring the oath we took. It’s our job to insure that their lives were not in vain.

  • Guest

    The very fact that gun control is even sought belies the presence of common sense. There is only ONE purpose, and that is to disarm and subjugate the population. If they went after other causes of death,ie, drunk driving, drugs, mentally unfit, etc. with the same fervor, guns would take the same back seat as sugar, fat, cigarettes, etc. ANYBODY who touts gun control is a closet proponent of authoritarianism, even if they don’t know it. The dangerous thing is that many of them don’t know it. They are unconsciously surrendering individualism and taking the path of least resistance; the flow of peer pressure. Unfortunately for us all, their peers are no more knowledgeable than themselves. Woe is us.

  • USMCBLACKOPS

    THE ABOVE ARTICLE RINGS TRUE: But Let all the Gun Owners in America send a ARTICLE to the Government and it’s Nazi Politicans, WE WILL DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION EVEN IF YOU WILL NOT, “YOU WAT OUR GUNS ? COME AND TRY AND TAKE THEM” a Terrorist is only as powerful as the people he can scare. STOP BEING COWARDS AMERICA,STAND UP AND FIGHT IF NECESSARY TO KEEP YOUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS. Hell even England has publically stated We should fight for Our Gun Rights. and the Teachers and others are succeeding in de-masculating the boys and making all the Children dependent on them and police for theor protection, only problem is the police are NOT First responders, they just come and mop up the mess when all is said and done. WAKE UP AMERICA.!!!!!!!I I Took My Oath and I will Live Up To It , “WILL ANY OF YOU”??????

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=629591346 Gary Jones

    I have many different kind of weapons from an AK-47″s to Muskets black powder and I have re-loaders for newer models. I have carried a pistol since 14 years old on the farm and hunted with long guns, then for my country in Vietnam and as a police officer and now as a citizen. So these leftist politicians and globalist repuks can kiss my red, white and blue because my weapons have two purposes #1.to protect Constitutional laws and rights within this document from foreign and domestic enemies #2. because it’s my inherent right as a USA citizen that protects all rights granted to me. I would rather die a free man that to bow to a traitors saber.

  • John W.H.

    ALL OF THAT WILL BE THE EAZY PART THE HARD PART WILL BE PRYING MY GUNS FROM MY COLD HANDS

  • Laird

    A lot of these steps assume compliance, and also inside information on individual gun owners and exactly what firearms they possess. Also, about the only cohesive group of “door-to-door” gun confiscators would be foreign troops, because most of our military and law enforcement would refuse to do it! Just saying!

  • JJ_Swiontek

    Two links and a quote:

    http://jpfo.org/

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

    An old Armenian saying, “He who wants to take my gun, wants to take my life.”

  • Bimbam

    It is strange, but when you armed with TRUE Bible knowledge and the understanding of who we thus are as Americans. I.e, we are the people spoken of in the Bible and not Jews!

    Those 10 steps are laughable to me and have no effect on my gun psyche of the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS!

    Only misguided sheeple will fall for such a laughable ploy.

    Thus said:

    Why we must fight? (And the simple remedy to cure it.)

    I have a theory and I think it’s true. I have been mulling over what a liberal is and why they do what they do. It may sound sophomoric and trite but I think it has to do with “spoilt-brat” syndrome and I’m not kidding.

    They actually want a revolution, they actually want a beating! You see, if you look at most liberals they had life easy, too easy. Everything was handed to them, most hardly worked hard at all. (Not all who lived privileged lives are like that, of course, because some were never given the opportunity to become spoilt brats by truly caring parents).

    If you examine most, if not all liberals, you will see most had vastly privileged lives. They cannot believe how stupid people are to put them in such undeserved positions in life! Thus, the typical adolescent and seemingly atrocious, ungrateful behavior they display for all to see.

    They cannot believe what is so easily lauded on them while the rest of us trudge through life. Honor, riches, come so easy so they develop a certain guilt. A guilt that makes them wonder why they have not been punished like the rest of us.

    So they do the most outrageous things. Things that people like you and me cannot understand the eventual SELF-DESTRUCTIVE behavior they want to give everyone. They actually want you to give them a beating so much that they impose this behavior on the rest of us. The more the merrier.

    I read somewhere once that teenagers said they actually wanted their parents to discipline them when they went awry. Thus the outrageous behavior. The proof of love was needed in the discipline. Remember the story about the bully kid who dared you to knock the block off his shoulder? Well, these spoilt brats are now all grown up daring you to knock their atrocious political agendas off their shoulders now.

    Look at your typical teenager. Is that not a liberal life? Everything is handed to you? No worry about food or shelter? No need to find work? See the similarities between liberal behavior and a teenager?

    Understanding this, you can see liberals were born to be a thorn on the side of society. Their behavior need not rile you anymore if you look at it as “spoilt brat” syndrome, even though they are adults now.

    NOW YOU KNOW THE REMEDY. Remember, they do the atrocious behavior on purpose to goad you into giving them the beating they want and never got in order to preserve THEIR SANITY and knock them down to reality! Poking them so they see this is not a fairy tale to them at all (the good undeserved life.)

    So by beating, I mean we must fight and confront all their nasty agendas. So be mean, be firm, never give in, but most of all give them the secular whacking they need and want not feel no compunction, guilt, or anger about. It does take getting off that couch, however.

    LET’S DO IT! There is a march taking place on November 5, 2013 to ARREST ALL OF CONGRESS, A CERTAIN MR. BARRY SAETORO, AND THE SUPREME COURT. IT IS NOT A PROTEST BUT A SIMPLE CITIZEN ARREST ACTION FOR THE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE USURPED THE CONSTITUTION WHICH THEY TOOK AN OATH TO DEFEND AND PRESERVE AND HAVE NOT FULFILLED THAT OBLIGATION OR DUTY AND HAVE COMMITTED TREASON.

    Do not be afraid. They all are liberals with spoil-brat syndrome and actually want to be arrested, want to be clobbered. We must carry through and do our duty lest we all suffer under this common but easily corrected malady and we must show we will not tolerate such atrocious behavior.

    And by not doing nothing we are being complicit in their outrageous behavior and may even show we approve of it! We must not send such a signal. And besides it is OUR right, and an esteemed obligation to remove a government being run by spoilt-brats and is no longer serving the people and is destructive. Anyone seen my belt?

  • DaHeat

    Polsters never ask what rank and file police officers think, they only talk to the paid for higher ups, i.e. the IACP, etc. Most street cops believe, rightly so, that all American citizens need to be armed for their own protection! As a career cop, I fully support the Second Amendment, as should every American citizen!… The Second Amendment is your permit to possess and carry firearms, anywhere…

  • celador2

    Thumbs Up!
    We could use Mr Steve Sheldon, authro of this article, in Congress

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jhon-Kacan/100003185883958 Jhon Kacan

    I*s will NOT working,believe me,that law are complete illegal,NOBAMA are illegals President and allien,by Law his sign nothing value,Dems can doing any malice propaganda and GOP will doing too,and we have a lot of evidences againt Dems for doing a propaganda for next 1000 years,Dems are a problem,dems have opposition by mayority of voter,more attack more enemys,more problems,less support,and Is not real start contraattack,not yet,don’t be sure Court be will support 100% dems,and all can change againt Dems,That Law are illegals,a US.Constitution is more powerfull and in court any Lawyer can easy challenger.Dem no believe in a US.Constitution,but is a personal problem of Dems,Law is Law,and any Court will follow a Law,not a illegal Dems-Law.I like see what doing Dems,is warrancy self destroy forever a Dems Party.Go ahead Nobama,in a few Months or years you will have all againt you.

  • KDS

    Let’s get the flouride out of the water, that’s where it all started our water supply. They could poison all of us if they wanted to. Commie Bastards!!

  • KDS

    Why not form our own neighborhood watch armed to the teeth!!!!

  • KDS

    Hiding your guns will not be enough, we need to demonstrate with them!!!

  • KDS

    Once they start re-educating your own children they will rat on everything you do for the
    state!!!

    • http://twitter.com/jamescr54174058 james crawford

      Right! And the teachers have to re-educate our kids…they’re union members. Nobody crosses the union.

  • EBlake

    England Considering Ban On Kitchen Knives

    http://lastresistance.com/906/england-considering-ban-on-kitchen-kn

    Yesterday here in the USA:

    Al Sharpton: Knife Control Comes Next After Guns
    http://conservativevideos.com/2013/01/al-sharpton-knife-control-comes-next-after-guns/

  • Bimbam

    Why they want to disarm you?

    They are going to devalue the dollar at first by may be 50%.

    They don’t know how you will react if you get up one morning and find your bank statement is devalued by 50%.

    Thus they put it the worthless racist negro that no one wants to criticize because we look down on negroes and don’t want to be labeled a racist by the racist themselves!!!

    A great game plan for the stupid and uninitiated.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-Williams/100000740775101 Dan Williams

    There will be an implementation problem in Texas. We will secede first.

  • Bob

    The sheeple consist of the ignorant, the ill informed, the low information voter. They are wooed by the siren call of the Liberal utopia nonsense. When the gangs, the maffia, the crooks give up their guns, let me know. Otherwise, stuff it!

  • GMT

    Wednesday, January 2, 2013

    Pravda: Americans Never Give Up Your Guns

    Understand this article and you will understand the real reason not to give up your guns.-RW

    By Stanislav Mishin

    These days, there are few few things to admire about the socialist,
    bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing
    remains: the right to bare arms and use deadly force to defend one’s
    self and possessions.

    This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers,
    but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on
    earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons,
    from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere,
    common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them
    holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional
    attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of
    Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders
    for rifles.

    Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles),
    or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under
    the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian
    lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk
    in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an
    extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on
    exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

    This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions
    to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they
    were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be
    noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers
    and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s
    clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite
    differently.

    Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but
    from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and
    were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their
    instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However,
    in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers
    (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and
    ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The
    Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene.
    They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register
    themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

    Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid
    and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first
    things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass
    repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass
    starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they
    had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the
    occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

    To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole
    generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still
    denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are
    told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would
    be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and
    to often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the
    uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is
    also laughable when statistics are examined.

    While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities,
    especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like
    they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who
    knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed
    population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and
    often enough, criminal abuse.

    For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd
    Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will
    use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime,
    but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and
    position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and
    often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill
    NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere),
    insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire
    bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to
    stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a
    bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are
    incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

    The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and
    silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of
    incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how
    we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from
    the same culture?

    No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot
    of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who
    claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the
    progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives,
    leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the
    hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They
    hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not
    obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for
    a barrel to the back of the ear.

    So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

  • Joseph Lobosco

    Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

    Barry Goldwater

    Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/barry_goldwater.html#rODsM5BbmC17Dylr.99

  • Martin

    Make the politicians give up THEIR guns and armed security FIRST. THEN, we’ll talk.

  • dextermassolettisr

    The more criminal the government the more difficult it is to distinguish it from common criminals — except for the magnitude of power and extent of damage.
    .

  • sbozich

    I love how more and more people these days have to mention that they are not “anti-law enforcement”! Guess what? You better damn-well be when they show up at your door! They lose all respect when they shred the Constitution. Then it’s game-on, bitches.

  • RSP

    Step 9 reminds me of the old saying “Be careful what you say, there are Quislings around.” For those that do not know of that time or the meaning talk to someone from Norway. Vidkun Quisling sold out his own country and had children turn in their parents and had neighbor against neighbor. One other suggestion, go to YOUTUBE and watch the documentary “Why we fight”. You can plainly see the parallels of the doctrine “Divide and Conquer” that are being played out here with this administration.

  • jimpeel

    Whoever holds a monopoly on firearms will also hold a monopoly on firearms violence.

    Do we want that monopoly to be held by the government?

  • spanky

    Noone is innocent when they wanna take away your rights, your property, your family, your life. Shoot first, sort it out later.

  • Bill Bitterass

    When it does truly hit the fan, you can expect almost ZERO media coverage of people resisting. There will be censorship, even on the net. They’ll be making it look like isolated incidents of “gun nuts” resisting the good guys. You won’t know how many people are standing shoulder to shoulder with you across the country. You’ll be portrayed as a loner. You’ll feel alone.

  • CG

    The first documented case of school violence in America occurred in 1557. A musket took the lives of several school children. The best shooters could only load a musket three to four times per minute.

    There have been numerous other school massacres in every century since. The
    worst disaster occurred in 1927. Forty-eight elementary school students were
    killed and more than fifty students and adults maimed in the “Bath Massacre.” They were killed and injured by fire and a bomb. No gun was used!

    Several years ago, a teacher in Augusta was stabbed more than thirty times about the face and head. Some of the stab wounds pierced her skull. She remained in a coma for more than a year before she died. The weapon was a damned pencil! Outlaw pencils?

    And now the attack on “assault weapons?” For the record, the definition of a military assault weapon requires that the weapon be an “automatic.” No automatic weapons are sold to anybody other than the military and the few people who possess the federal stamp required to collect them.

    There are 20,000 laws in this country which restrict where law abiding citizens may defend themselves. NEVER ONCE has a criminal or insane person honored any one of them. “Gun free zones” only serve to enable bad people doing bad things. They also will always find ways to get or create weapons. Controlling guns only gives evil people the upper hand. To do so would turn this country into another Mexico, where gangs are in control. Nobody can legislate morality. What can we do. IDK, but I have three thoughts.

    – Improve the Mental Health Care System and make it available to everyone.

    – Restore discipline and responsibility everywhere. There is none in this country anymore. Years ago, neighbors disciplined kids when their parents wouldn’t. Today, look sternly at somebody else’s child, and risk being sued.

    – Secure weapons not in use. Punish those who refuse to do so. If a firearm is not in your hand, in your car, in your holster, or otherwise under your personal control, it should be in a locked gun-safe, or have a good trigger locking mechanism.

    This country has a long history of respect for our Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment. Millions of citizens have sworn the oath the “preserve and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The President himself takes that oath. Hundreds of thousands of service members have given their lives while honoring
    that oath. They took it very seriously. Wouldn’t all their sacrifices be for naught, if we allowed our Constitution to be bastardized here at home? Never forget!

  • TS

    You forgot a few steps:

    1. GPS mark all doors to any inhabitable buildings.

    2. Use George Soros’ Holdings (hi !) to buy up all ammunition plants (and graineries or whatever they’re called, while your at it so you control food supply)

  • Tonto

    Ted Kennedy’s Oldsmobile killed more people than all my family’s firearms.

    Reckon we should ban Oldsmobiles, too?

  • Tonto

    Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.”  — Mohandas Ghandi, An Autobiography, page 446

    Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.”  — Mohandas Ghandi, An Autobiography, page 446

    This is not politically correct enough for Facebook so I posted it twice.

  • stevenmarkpilling

    We’re up to Step Seven. Expect #8 shortly, as Obama makes his final push for unrestricted power.

  • MtGumby

    You had me right up till the Hitler comparison.
    Not that I do not agree with what you say…but I know how people think and you will lose a huge percentage with the Hitler comment.

    • http://profiles.google.com/williamdavidtipton wm tipton

      Didnt lose me with the HItler thing or anyone I know with it because WE understand the history involved AND that human nature NEVER changes.
      There are Hitlers on this earth right now who are willing to commit genocide at the drop of a hat….do you deny that?
      Hitler came into power because of idiots who werent paying attention to reality…just like liberals arent paying attention to REALITY today…

  • http://profiles.google.com/williamdavidtipton wm tipton

    What guns? I dont own any guns. I sold them all about 6 months ago. Receipts? Sorry I guess I lost them.

  • http://www.owl-works.com/ OwlWorks

    And then we will all be slaves:

    “No slave shall keep any arms whatever, nor pass unless with written
    orders from his master or employer, or in his company with arms, from
    one place to another. Arms in possession of a slave contrary to this
    prohibition, shall be forfeited to him who will seize them.”

    ~State of Virginia, October 1785 – ACT LXXVII. An act concerning slaves

  • Joseph Labeck

    I don’t know if ‘feminize the society’ is a term I would use as that may unintentionally alienate some folks, but society being lulled into complacency certainly fits the bill. People always fear what they don’t understand, and although a weapon is certainly to be respected, being mortally terrified of them for as long as you live is an infantile method of dealing with them. Great article.

  • JeromefromLayton

    The scary thing is that we are about 75% along the way. The Feinstein ugly gun ban was Federal Law for ten years until it expired. California wrote their version in 1999 (SB-22, Perata) which was even worse. Anybody know what a “slung” is? It’s prohibited by SB-22. Hint: It was copied from a Reconstruction era Texas law just as the 1968 gun law was copied from the early 3rd Reich version (Senator Dodd). Today, we have an Administration that is all too willing to circumvent the Constitution and current law with Executive Orders and “Actions”. Could the UN Arms Control Treaty be enabled via Executive Actions sans Ratification by the Senate? Anybody want to bet against the current WH occupant trying to do that?

  • grdn

    Okay ………………. so they are already doing all that is stated in the article and guns are being bought like there is no tomorrow regardless. We’re not buying it, but are seeing through their ‘deceit’ ! Bottom line, this tyrannical gov. is left with only one option and that is through force. This force will turn into ‘guerrilla’ warfare lasting decades. The blood will run deep for both us and them. Liberty is our cause ! What is their cause and is it worth it to them to die for.

The latest from ClashDaily.com