Grasscity - Cyber Week Sale - up to 50% Discount

what happens when goverments disarm their citizens?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by BASEDGOD38, Jan 2, 2013.

  1. i came across this post on facebook, here's a video and some text, not sure how accurate the text is, but really makes you think. figured it'd make for a good discussion!
    Innocents Betrayed - YouTube
    What happens when governments disarm their citizens?

    -In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
    -In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    -Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    -China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated
    -Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    -Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    -Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    -Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

    [Editor: You can argue about the numbers, but the point here is that disarmed citizens are vulnerable, and that there are many historical examples of disarmed citizens being killed and oppressed by their own government. The excuse given by authorities that they need to take guns away from citizens in order to lower crime rates is not supported by facts. Even if a government does not turn on its own citizens after disarming them, people are less safe - because unarmed citizens are easy targets to criminals. Over and over again, it has been clearly shown that taking guns away from citizens does not lead to a decrease in crime but rather a dramatic increase.]

    Video Documentary Via Mike Adams the Health Ranger of "Gun Control is Genocide" -·> Gun Control is Genocide - documentary by Mike Adams - YouTube

    INNOCENTS BETRAYED - The TRUE story of GUN CONTROL WORLDWIDE (Documentary - 58 Mins) - Innocents Betrayed - YouTube

    You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'. During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends.



    Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

    It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us. You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people.


    "Gun control has cleared the way for seven major genocides since 1915, in which governments gone bad murdered 56,000,000 persons, including millions of children." -Aaron Zelman of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
  2. theres wont be anymore gun control. how can they ban guns when theres enough guns and ammo already out there to arm everyone up x10. theres no real plausible thing the feds can do. other then spying on us more.
    I almost feel like its just marketing hype to get people to buy assault rifles from the arms industry.
    Obama is the best thing to happen to gun manufacturers. and i tend to follow the money.
  3. interesting...but If they banned sale of all firearms on a national level, within a few decades the amount of guns would decrease with theft, malfunctioning, whatever else, and if they made that a law... who knows if they would also make it illegal to posses a firearm, then send troops to go collect those who bought them legally since they could gain access to the paperwork?
  4. they arent gonna send troops out to round up guns. they arent that dumb, they know the gun culture in the south. imo.

  5. I have to agree. These people don't rush things look at every other right in the constitution, its all slowly taken away little by little. Are they going to ban guns this year no way, are they eventually going to try to ban guns 20 years from now, yes. Just like they've done to free speech, the 4th amendment and so on and so forth.

    They take away rights step by incremental step. Think of how many laws and regulations are passed every year now multiply that number by 20-50 years they will regulate everything soon enough.
  6. their will bee evre lasting piece.
  7. sorry but , they have already done a gun grab in Louisianna before, when hurrican katrina hit
  8. They are doing one in Connecticut. The more powerful the gun the more money you get... no questions asked...

    When the government has successfully disarmed the civilian population, that is when the transition to an authoritarian regime is complete.

    This shouldn't be something to be taken lightly. Once the Bill of Rights starts to get trampled on, which it already has in several ways, we are no longer the free society we are supposed to be.
  9. That pretty.much sums it up.

    Gun control advocates havenothing but emotional fallacies

    Gun rights advocates have mounds of hard evidence.

    Gun control in all forms is bad. Its been proven throughout history.

    Never in the entire history of the planet has any form of gun control ever helped society

  10. Free speech is not banned? There are people speaking out against the government and corporations everywhere.

    On topic though, I don't think Obama is naive enough to really think he can take away the peoples right to arm themselves. He might try to put through more regulation though...
  11. #11 CrunkJuice2, Jan 3, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2013
    well if you look at previous things that have gotten put on the table.who knows

    im not saying that there gonna take away everyones guns though,if will just be more useless gun control laws that wont work,if theres anything people to need to be afraid of its gonna be what happens when we see gun control laws end up failing and what happens after that

  12. New law makes it illegal to protest in Obama's presence, Does this sound like George Washington or Hitler?

    Brigham City, Utah Faces Legal Challenge Over Its 'Free-Speech Zones'

    These free speech zone laws are happening all over the country.

  13. freedom of speech is one thing.using common sense is another
  14. #14 Lenny., Jan 3, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2013
    I disagree. With organizations like the FCC, I consider that speech isn't fully free.

    A private broadcasting institution, like a radio station or a TV show should be able to say FUCK without getting fined.. The government collects money on restricting your first amendment rights, that is straight up sickening.

    That might not seem all too severe, because you're free to speak out against the government (which is a major reason for free speech laws) but, the FCC is a flat out disgrace to the first amendment.
  15. Moar gun laws!
  16. If you think that not being able to protest in the presence of the president is "banning free speech" you need to take a trip down to Ecuador. If free speech is banned as you say then why did I see a person holding a sign protesting drone strikes last saturday? Why am I able to go on a social networking site and shit all over the government? How are websites like wikileaks still up and running?

  17. I think there is a miscommunication, I meant that they are slowly taking our rights away with incremental laws and regulation, they have done this with every right in the Bill of Rights. They haven't banned free speech yet, but they are slowly but surely limiting it until one day, it will be de facto banned. Just like gun rights and just like every other right. The American people are asleep and will give away their rights little by little.
    Although Obama and his pals have been pretty blunt with banning our right to a trial, with the NDAA.

  18. I see you're point but it still is not a ban on free speech. A fine and being tortured/murdered are two very different things.

    I def agree that the FCC should not have any say in what the media broadcasts though.
  19. SOPA and CISPA are two other bills that if passed would restrict our free speech rights. There are too many bills to list that restrict our freedoms.

  20. well,if they were in fact going to do sure people would of protested it

    i mean,your forgetting how many people protested against sopa when that first came around.and how many people in michigan protested against right to work

Share This Page