Why Gun Control is Bad for America

Jim Fetzer and Press TV

 

In apparent violation of his Constitutional Oath of Office, President Barack Hussein Obama has been aggressively promoting gun control, including a recent appearance in Denver, CO, where there are reasons to believe that Colorado is going to be the pilot project for a nation-wide effort to secure universal registration as a step toward confiscation.  

I wish it were not true, but history has shown that, in case after case, tyrannical governments have adopted the policy of requiring gun owners to register their ownership of weapons as an essential step in their confiscation.  Even Canadians have been appalled at the extent to which that has occurred in their own country, just as critics had predicted, right up until now, when it has abandoned registration.

American Rifleman has published an article by Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D., J.D., in which he explained how Hitler’s use  of firearms registration lists led to the confiscate of guns and to the execution of gun owners, which offers a powerful lesson, one that reveals why the American people and Congress should reject the registration of firearms by law-abiding Americans.

As he observes, “The reason is plain. Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and to make prey of its subjects. Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people.”

In spite of the historic precedents of Turkey, Russia, Germany, China, Guatemala, Uganda, Cambodia and Rwanda, we have an administration that appears to be completely dedicated and systematically advancing an agenda that has the ultimate goal of depriving the American people of their ability to withstand the tyranny of our own government:

1. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves against their ethnic-cleansing government, were arrested and exterminated.   

2. In 1929, the former Soviet Union established gun control as a means of controlling the “more difficult” of their citizens. From 1929 to the death of Stalin, 40 million Soviets met an untimely end at the hand of various governmental agencies as they were arrested and exterminated.   

3. After the rise of the Nazi’s, Germany established their version of gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves against the “Brown Shirts”, were arrested and exterminated.   

Interestingly, the Brown Shirts were eventually targeted for extermination themselves following their blind acts of allegiance to Hitler. Any American military and police would be wise to grasp the historical significance of the Brown Shirts’ fate.   

4. After Communist China established gun control in 1935, an estimated 50 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves against their fascist leaders, were arrested and exterminated.   

5. Closer to home, Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayans, unable to defend themselves against their ruthless dictatorship, were arrested and exterminated.   

6. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves from their dictatorial government, were arrested and exterminated.   

7. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million of the “educated” people, unable to defend themselves against their fascist government, were arrested and exterminated.   

8. In 1994, Rwanda disarmed the Tutsi people and being unable to defend themselves from their totalitarian government, nearly one million were summarily executed.

 While President Barack Obama talked about gun violence during a speech in Denver on April 3, lauding recent gun-control measures that have been signed into state law and touting Colorado as being “a model of what’s possible” at the national level, that should not be taken as a positive sign for what the future may hold. The emotional impact of shootings in Tucson, Aurora and Sandy Hook–which have not been properly investigated–raise more questions than they answer.  “Every day that we wait to do something about it, even more of our fellow citizens are stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun,” Obama said.  But there are very good reasons to doubt that that is the case.

According to the latest reports, “Governor Hickenlooper About To Give Secret Service Power To Arrest Colorado Sheriffs”, the Federal government is laying the groundwork to allow the Secret Service start arresting Sheriffs for not enforcing new gun control laws, not matter how unConstitutional, starting with Colorado:

By the sounds of it, Colorado is being targeted with an attempt to set up loopholes that will allow the U.S. Secret Service to arrest and remove an elected sheriff for refusing to enforce the law, or anyone breaking the law. This means ALL Secret Service including uniformed division officers, physical security technicians, specialists, and other ‘special officers’.   In short they want to,

…establish federal authority police powers in a State, enabling an enforcement arm reporting directly to the president (Secret Service). It would enable the president / executive branch to theoretically override the actions and preventative measures that are now being taken by many States throughout the country who are trying to preserve 2nd Amendment gun rights and who are prohibiting the enforcement of unconstitutional law passed by Congress or pushed by executive order.

Most of us are well aware that just about every Sheriff across the country, including our own Weld and Larimer Sheriffs (about 350 in all) have said that they will not enforce any mandate from Washington if it violates the Second Amendment, which these future mandates do.   Many states are trying to pass gun control bills, but politicians in Colorado have all but passed Senate Bill SB-13-013 which will give “police powers” and “arrest authority” to the federal/executive branch of government (Secret Service) within the State.

When the President of the United States subverts the Constitution and promotes an aggressive policy of registration, which history has shown leads to confiscation, the American people are going to have to take a stand for their rights under the 2nd amendment or buckle and obey the most blatant gun-grab in our nation’s history. With the assault on Sheriffs, who have shown their commitment to the Constitution, which Obama is taking steps to combat, there remains scant room for doubt that our civil war will start in Colorado and is not going to be long in coming.  

Why Gun Control is Bad for America

Dr. James H. Fetzer

There are good reasons to believe Sandy Hook was a staged event and did not take place as federal, state and local officials have claimed. Had 20 children been shot in their classroom, then swarms of EMTs and ambulances would have been expected on the scene to rush them to hospitals for qualified physicians to determine whether they were dead or alive and treated them. They were instead left in place in the building and removed in darkness and complete secrecy.

There is a widespread belief that, when most Americans are strongly supportive of new gun control legislation because of the atrocities at Sandy Hook, yet it still appears unlikely to pass in Congress, we therefore have a failure of the democratic process. But there are multiple reasons why new gun control will not become the law of the land but also why the country is far better off without it and should not have more gun control.

First, there are the traditional Constitutional questions that revolved around the 2nd amendment. While some experts maintain that it was added because of the need for a citizen militia that could defend the nation in times of need and therefore does not support ownership of a wide range of weapons, the Supreme Court has supported a broader interpretation of the law as a fundamental right of American citizens.

Second, there is a disconnect between the alleged cause (the events of Sandy Hook) and the proposed solution (passage of strict control of assault weapons). The weapons Adam Lanza is alleged to have used were lawfully obtained by his mother in accord with Connecticut laws, where the restrictive legislation that has been proposed would not have affected his access to them. They don’t solve the problem.

Indeed, while Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) has become obsessive in her pursuit of new legislation, a far more rational response has come from Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who has implied he will filibuster new proposals (as he did with drone legislation) and has said to Obama, “Call me if any of your reforms would’ve saved those kids at Sandy Hook”. While the GOP and NRA have been accused of politicizing the situation, the weight of the evidence actually falls on the other side.

Third, there are good reasons to believe Sandy Hook was a staged event and did not take place as federal, state and local officials have claimed. Had 20 children been shot in their classroom, then swarms of EMTs and ambulances would have been expected on the scene to rush them to hospitals for qualified physicians to determine whether they were dead or alive and treated them. They were instead left in place in the building and removed in darkness and complete secrecy.

It is reminiscent of the alleged crash of a Boeing 757 at Shanksville, PA, which allegedly disappeared into the soft ground because it had been a mining area. One version even had the plane disappearing into an abandoned mine shaft. But we know what to do with miners who are trapped in mine shafts. We break out the bright lights and the heavy equipment and dig, 24/7, in the hope that by some miracle someone might have survived. But that didn’t happen at Shanksville. even to recover the bodies that were allegedly entombed in the plane.

That makes no sense if either of these events had taken place as advertised. The government counts on the gullibility of the American people to believe what we are told, not matter how preposterous. The national networks all reported that the body of the accused had been found with only handguns in the vicinity, where the assault weapon–which has been used to justify this push for new legislation–was left in the trunk of the car he had driven to the school. The networks had even confirmed their report with federal, state and local authorities.

 Indeed, the Social Security Death Index even shows Adam Lanza having died on the 13th of December, when the shooting took place on the 14th. James Tracy and I are not the only ones to have taken a look at Sandy Hook and concluded that a huge scam and gun control “psy op” is taking place, but an ”inside insider” who has served in five administrations, Steve Pieczenik, declared during a widely broadcast radio show that Sandy Hook was a hoax and no children died there.

Fourth, a subcommittee of the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Intelligence issued a finding on October 3rd that it had studied 680 “fusion center” reports from 2009 to 2010 (where fusion centers merge federal, state and local anti-terrorism efforts) and that those reports had revealed no evidence of any domestic terrorist acts or activities, which makes it very reasonable-given the size of the sample-that there is no or virtually no “domestic terrorist activity”.

Fifth, this makes it all the more disturbing DHS has acquired more than 1.5 billion rounds of .40 caliber hollow-point ammunition, which is not even permissible in combat under the Hague Treaty of 1899. And since DHS has no foreign commitments, it is not rocket science to conclude that this enormous stock of ammo must be for use in the US against the American public. Astonishingly, DHS has refused to reply to questions from members of Congress about what’s going on.

As though that were not disturbing enough, DHS has also acquired 2,700 light tanks suitable for urban warfare, 7,000 assault weapons of the very kind new legislation would constrict, and has made special arrangements to use mortuaries and funeral homes in case there were to be massive civilian casualties that overwhelmed emergency medical facilities and hospitals in the case of an “unexpected event”.

Sixth, having offered courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years, this new move for gun control illustrates the common fallacy known as “popular sentiments”, where beliefs that are widely held are therefore assumed to be true. But the rush for gun control appears to be designed to weaken our ability to resist the imposition of control by force of arms over the American people. The only obstacle to tyranny is 100,000,000 armed United States citizens.

The rationale for the 2nd amendment appears to apply here. We are in a of time of need for a citizen militia that might defend this nation from domestic tyranny, not because of any “domestic terrorists” of the kind we have been warned against but from our own Department of Homeland Security. That new gun control legislation will not pass is a good thing, because we need have all the ability that we can muster to resist the tyranny of enemies, who are not foreign, but domestic.

JF/JR