National Why Take Guns?

[DuneHopper]

I have talked with many pro-activist some famous, some way more knowledgeable then me, and yet when we have a deep serious discussion no one can answer this one simple question.

Why, Take Guns ?

Sure there are speculated thoughts.

1. NWO
2. Socialism
3. complete gun bans

We all know they are wanting our guns and not just a few but all.
So Why, Take Guns ?

Its clear our honorable military wont take them from us, and there is simply no clear end game.
We have ideas, but stopping gun violence doesn't work because this was going on long before any televised shootings and seems to have come about around 1900 when cities looked at crime in the large cities and firearms, as well as increased travel abilities.

OK we know what causes all these acts, but very very smart people, can still only speculate and guess on what the end game is. And if there is a end game, the masses are following blindly, as well know they are not even reading FBI stats.

( #43 proposal is a great one to ask, as there is no problem at all here with semi-autos, so if their plan was to confiscate, ok fine, but why.... where is that piece they are heading for and we can speculate all we want but that wont answer.........Why, Take Guns ?
We know why China, and Hilter did, so why us?


So if you want to talk on this subject, this is not asking what causes them to do what they are doing, they have a list they make up at will. But what is that clear end game ?
Analogy, "We want all cities in the USA to have clean water, so we pass laws requiring all cities to have treatment plants so all have fresh water"
Clear as a bell there is a problem needs solving and a clear answer to why they want this.

Why, Take Guns ? It way to easy to simply say they want them due to gun violence as there is proof to the contrary, and if that is true why are liberal-antis, law makers all heading towards some unknown solution.


Your thoughts?

Read More

 

[Vendor Hidden]

The same reason Gen. Gage wanted to take them away: Control.

 

[DuneHopper]

The same reason Gen. Gage wanted to take them away: Control.

True, and i think thats a given, but control in what way. Whats the end game? They already are controlling our use of guns
so whats after ??

 

[cigars]

After the guns are gone, then they can tax us all into oblivion in the name of pet causes like global warming, social justice, or whatever the feel good progressive topic of the week is. Of course, when they tax us then it will be at gun point.

 

[Connor Murphy]

Government fears a well armed populace. A disarmed one, not so much.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Its clear our honorable military wont take them from us, and there is simply no clear end game.

 

[E4mafia]

I always figured it had something do with ensuring your opposition has as little strength as possible so you can completely steam roll them.

I mean hey once jobs and other liberties in life go completely to sh!t at least we know when people start storming down on the capital wanting to string up the people responsible at least they won't have to worry about you having a means of fighting back. IF people would even do that these days, so I just see it as another form of complacency to be compliant and just do as your told and providing to the state blindly.

Lets look at the UK or EU as a prime example of what the end game is :^)

 

[308]

Just following orders. Too much personal risk in not following orders.

 

[Vendor Hidden]

True, and i think thats a given, but control in what way.

In whatever way the gov't desires.

It's an open-ended kind of control they are "shooting" for, and a disarmed populace means gov't can easily manage and control every aspect of life:

• Speech / Thought (so called "Hate speech" will be expanded to include unpopular political speech - similar to the Left's efforts to de-humanize and minimize their opponents, except this will be done by the gov't itself)
  
• Information (Free flow of information will be controlled, only approved information that's not "fake" will be allowed)
  
• Travel (Right now, even with the 2A, it's impossible to travel with a gun everywhere)
  
• Food / Water (access will be denied those who don't accede to the religion of environmentalism - there will be no rights to food and water on your own property
• Property (No right to privacy. No right to do as you wish with your property, etc.)

Just look at the history of totalitarianism. That's what's in store for us as an unarmed people.

 

[UserNameInUse]

I struggle with this question as well because it doesn't make sense. The best I can come up with is fear of things they are not familiar with and hatred of a culture they do not understand. For all the talk of diversity and acceptance their actions say it all.

I wonder, when they achieve a ban do they feel like it was worth the cost? It lost them the Presidency and the Supreme Court, not to mention the staggering amount of money spent.

Imagine what the current political climate would be like if the Democrats had just left guns alone.

 

[JeremyK]

Boy I really dig that 200 pound cop slamming that 80 year old woman against the wall like that. She must have been a HUGE threat.

My f***ing hero...

 

[Ownerus]

.....Just look at the history of totalitarianism. That's what's in store for us as an unarmed people.

This.
Nothing new under the sun. ESPECIALLY this.

 

[Stomper]

To answer the OP's question.... ask the surviving WWII era European Jews, they'll tell you why!

 

[Elf]

I struggle with this question as well because it doesn't make sense. The best I can come up with is fear of things they are not familiar with and hatred of a culture they do not understand. For all the talk of diversity and acceptance their actions say it all.

Honestly I think this is the most accurate "occam's razor" explanation. While politicians may not like the aspect of an armed society not under their control, on a day to day basis I doubt it is part of any larger conspiracy but rather just an attempt to use fear and emotion to add to the momentum of partisan politics.

Plenty of other non-gun examples of this where emotional propaganda begets political activism and bigger government.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

Let me adjust the antenna on my tinfoil hat
....................................... ok...

Look up UN Agenda 2030 and UN Office of Disarmament Affairs. Hint: They think you can't cram a bunch of heavily armed people into a high density living environment and expect there to be no violence issues.

Adjusting tinfoil hat to more calming airwaves.......

 

[Vendor Hidden]

I doubt it is part of any larger conspiracy

I agree. It's not a conspiracy. For most, the gun control impulse is more like a runaway emotional response to news of people getting hurt. They are idealists and utopians who believe Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood can be achieved. Unfortunately, they have not fully considered the ramifications of an all out ban. I have several of these in my family, and they serve as useful idiots for the second type of gun grabbers.

The second type know very well what the long term results would be of an America without guns, and they are eager to make it happen. Of these, you will never hear the smart ones say "We want your guns", though occasionally you'll hear it from the lower-level peons (David Hogg is one of the smart ones - "smart" relative to the others - but you will hear it from several of his less-trained comrades). These people use the previous group to their advantage and adopt much of the same arguments so as to appear reasonable and compassionate. But make no mistake, these clowns want to eliminate gun ownership for the very reason I mentioned in my first post: They want control.

It's not a conspiracy. It's a goal.

 

[Legs]

Democrats' long hatred of "the old white guy's conservative club, the NRA, has morphed into the anti-gun desires of liberals that we see today. The NRA has wielded much power in the political arena, favoring pro-gun leaning candidates, and rallying against those that won't support the 2A. This really ramped up in the late sixties, early seventies as urban areas became more violent. Still are today. Gun control hasn't helped.

 

[Legs]

I beg to differ. Gun control is listed on the Democratic Party's platform, funded by billionares, and pushed by politicians. Oh yes, it's a conspiracy to disarm the populace and take down pro-gun groups.

 

[mrblond]

the 1% or the 1/2% want to go back to feudalism, where they control everything. there is no middle class, just the elites and the peasants.
They cant do that to a armed population.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

the 1% or the 1/2% want to go back to feudalism, where they control everything. there is no middle class, just the elites and the peasants.
They cant do that to a armed population.

An armed populace are citizens. An unarmed populace are subjects or slaves.