Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Firearms (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=159)
- - There is One Type of Total Gun Ban that We Need, (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=372875)

Nomoss | 05-05-2009 09:19 PM
There is One Type of Total Gun Ban that We Need, Jefferson Would Agree, and It�s the Key to Bringing Back 1776 Jeffrey Grupp Infowars http://www.infowars.com/there-is-one...ing-back-1776/ May 4, 20099 What I have to say in this article may deeply anger or enrage many who read it. But what I have to say is no more than a rewording of this miraculous passage from Thomas Jefferson: �[E]very able-bodied freeman, between the ages of sixteen and fifty, is enrolled in the militia� The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service.� -Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Quivery IX I think that very few Americans have thought deeply about this passage, what it�s really saying, and thus very few understand the ramifications of this passage�even those in the heart of the Truth Movement may not have thought about this passage deeply enough to really see that this passage may be the key to everything. How is it the key to everything? You might think it is by the way this passage promotes Second Amendment issues. That is true, but that is not what I am getting at here. We already all know that. What this passage really involves is actually a far bigger issue, one that I think very few of us have noticed, amazingly. Jefferson says that it is the ordinary citizens who are the militia. Jefferson does not say that it is certain government-VIP groups, or any other government groups, who are members of the militia. (These VIP groups are the police and military, which are �standing armies�, if armed or maybe even if unarmed, when they are amassed on US soil; and they are groups like the FDA or USGS or NSA. These are groups that are given elevated status over the level of citizen by big government. From what I can tell, this basic issue is anti-Jeffersonian and/or unconstitutional.) That is the key: it is the citizens, and definitely not any (unconstitutional) government-favored special groups, who are the militia: who are the real homeland security. Jefferson�s passage at the start of this article clearly lays this out, and it requires that almost all of us rearrange our thinking in order to get back to a 1776 mental framework. I sense that even listeners of the Alex Jones Show may have this thesis I am presenting here hit them with a shock, like a ton of bricks, as if it�s a radical thesis. But that just shows us how far we�ve come from 1776, and how subtly we�re all still under the trickery of the New World Order, even if we think we are so enlightened since we are Alex Jones listeners, guns owners, and members of the Patriot movement. Ok, with the thesis laid out, now let�s see how this Jeffersonian vision works� So, what does this all mean? What would it mean if we had a total weapon and total gun ban for on-duty police and for military and post-Constitutional government entities? What would really happen in such a scenario? Well, it must be something quite good for the people that happens, since governments worldwide fight against this sort of a scenario almost more than they fight against anything. But more specifically, it means that it is against the law, against the Founders, and against 1776, for on-duty police, military, and for the aforementioned post-Constitutional government entities (FDA, CIA, EPA, Dept. of Education, etc.) to possess firearms (including any projectile weapon, such as non-lethal weapons [tasers, etc.] or crossbows or longbows, microwave guns, etc.), since these big-government-favored groups are not part of the militia. That�s the key issue, and this is all very important; so let�s get this down pat in more detail. How are on-duty police, military, and for the aforementioned post-Constitutional government entities (FDA, CIA, EPA, Dept. of Education, etc.) not part of the militia, in Jefferson�s philosophy? Here�s how: These big-government-favored groups are elevated in power above the status of being an ordinary citizen, but Jefferson says it�s only those of the status of ordinary citizen who are party of the militia (who are gun owners), thus if you fall outside of this ordinary citizen group you are breaking the law if you own a weapon! That is what Jefferson�s comments lead to, and if we explore the ramifications of this (as I am going to next), you will perhaps agree that this is Jefferson�s greatest, largest, and most critical issue for preservation of the Constitutional Republic. So let�s figure out why this issue�gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities�is really the single issue we should focus on perhaps more than any other. There are so many issues we members of the Truth and Patriot movements have to grapple with. If we want our country back, if we want back what Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Henry, and the rest of the Founders set up for us, where on earth do we start when we are in such an incredible quagmire today, where we have strayed so unimaginably far from the Founders� Republic? We have to deal with pandemic hoaxes, GM food plagues, FEMA holocaust, secret government, false flag terror, government robot weapons, attempts by big government to destroy inalienable rights, vaccine holocausts, depleted uranium, and all the rest that infowars.com patriots are all too familiar with. It is perhaps a daunting task when we consider how much we have to deal with. But what if we could reduce all these issues down to one, single issue�an issue that�s power-source of all the others�wherein we could focus in on that one issue, obliterate it, and ipso facto, 1776 would be restored? That is precisely what is at stake in the aforementioned issue of pushing for a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities. This is a simple issue, a clearly definable issue, one that could easily get huge amounts of support since already 70 percent (or more) of Americans are pro-Second Amendment (and this is growing fast). So, let�s see why if we won that single battle of removing weaponry from government, military, and on-duty police, that all other things would fall into place. Yes, that�s right, we need one type of gun control. We need gun control for on-duty police and any military and government officials who are on US soil (excluding Congress, the President, and perhaps the members of the Supreme Court, since they may be members of the militia, in Jefferson�s vision). This would include any group that even loosely resembled a standing army (such as privatized military forces like Blackwater) since they are unconstitutional, except for the one Constitutional standing army: the militia. In other words, on-duty police should banned from possessing guns, as should any government people in the military, FDA, CIA, and any of the other post-Constitutional monstrosities that we Americans have permitted to come into existence and control every aspect of us down to our consciousness. The way this would happen peacefully is if members of these big-government-favored groups deprogrammed from their brainwashing and voluntarily put down their arms in order to join this Second Amendment Jeffersonian revolution. I think getting this to happen is doable. What will be the net effect of this? It would have such tremendous ramifications that it would bring us right back to the America that the Founders established for us. Consider how this works. If we had unarmed police and military, we would have police and military that would be no threat to any gun-owner (�one man with a gun can control a hundred without one�). I cannot underestimate the importance of this. Eventually the balance of power would shift to such a degree that government would be under the control of the gun owners (of the Jeffersonian militia). Why? Because anyone out there who is in any way fired up about the Second Amendment knows that the feeling of owning a gun, carrying a gun, is so safe, secure, and free, that the joy it brings just blossoms within you in such a way that you glue on to that feeling of freedom almost as tightly as you hug your child. So, in other words, the gun owners would thrive and unite in their euphoria of freedom and Constitutionalism, by the feelings they have inside from carrying the gun. I can see this in a lower-level form when I am at the shooting range, at the gun shop. I can see it in the eyes, feel it in the hearts, of my fellow pro-Second Amendment friends, and there are a lot of them. As Alex Jones has said, protecting our Second Amendment is the one thing that millions will lay down everything and fight for right now. This is because the gun owner knows, feels, how the peace-of-mind of holding the gun is the key to freedom, as Jefferson and many of the Founders did too. Jefferson describes the issue most clearly: As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body, and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks. Never think of taking a book with you. The object of walking is to relax the mind. You should therefore not permit yourself even to think while you walk; but divert yourself by the objects surrounding you. Walking is the best possible exercise. Habituate yourself to walk very far. �Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785 It is the gun, the Second Amendment, that gives freedom. Without it we are slaves; with it we can be like Jefferson on his walks, with a mind clear and liberated, unworried and free to philosophize. The feelings of freedom that gun owners employ would overflow if there was a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities. This is because it would instantly be the case that 1. The citizens would not have a powerful military or police force to fall back on and be dependent upon, and thus they would have to assume those responsibilities for themselves, and they would become the police and military, they would assume those roles: fathers would become protectors instead of TV-watchers, grandfathers would again take their grandchildren to the range, women would again recognize the urgency to carry a pistol wherever they go, and women would walk through parking lots at night without a shred of fear (a woman empowered, without fear: a feminism the fake feminists will never know). Again, in the current state of TV-addicted-America, this sounds odd to many who think dialing 911 is the key to safety, but again, I am just rewording what Jefferson has already said when he told that what I am writing about in this article is real homeland security: ��our attention should be fixed on the safety of our country. For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia [citizens] is their best security.� �Jefferson, Eight Annual Message, Nov. 8, 1888. 2. Without the illusion of �security� from the big government police and military forces, the citizens would not have a powerful military or police force to fall back on and be dependent upon, and thus they would feel that they have no protection�as if they are �naked in the wilderness��citizens would in this case do what people always do: they would seek out protection, and the best protection, they would find, is the gun. There is already so much pro-gun fervor in America, that quickly after a disarming of on-duty police and of military and non-Constitutional government entities, there would be an overpowering zeitgeist in the air that the best protection is the gun (this zeitgeist already exists in America at a lower level, as it it�s just waiting to overflow). Consequently, those who are gun owners would amplify their devotion to their art, and those who are not would become passionate gun owners by the millions. We would quickly change from a helpless nation to a nation empowered. Now, what I have described so far in this article is a blueprint for how we completely disempower the government, and radically empower the citizenry. And this all occurred from one little issue: institute a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities. Notice: this is a single issue, not many issues. This is one issue that can solve all other issues. This is not like trying to do many things: it is not trying to reign in GM food, vaccines, and the Fed all at once. It�s a much simpler task: you just do one thing, which is disarm the big-government-favored groups. And if we all focused our energy on this one issue, we could get it done, and the rest of the 1776 cards would fall into place. And here�s why this issue of disarming the big-government-favored groups is the issue that allows everything else about the New World Order to fall away, from vaccines to draft, to carbon tax, to ID chip. Here�s what America would look like with disarmed big-government-favored groups: A. On the one hand, there would be the armed, patriotic America, which would consist of a mass of wide-eyed, passionate, happy gun owners (sort of like a vaster version of what I already see at a much smaller scale at the shooting range every Saturday), with confidence, character, and inner peace (as Jefferson described in a passage above), which would number in the hundreds of millions B. And then on the other hand, there would be a completely unarmed government, numbering only a tiny fraction of those described in a. The power is with A. And what about B? Well� B is, well, rather pathetic, isn�t it. We are, at any moment, incredibly close to this sort of a scenario, since there is only one thing we need to do to put this sort of a world in place: disarm on-duty police, disarm military on US soil (or maybe all military, at least for a time), and any other big-government-favored groups. Just from this disarmament, A and B fall into place. Do you see what happens then, if A and B are in place? Government has no authority; gun owners are authority�they are government! What do you think would happen if B tried to tell A that they can�t have a garden because they might plant pot in it? Yeah, I am laughing too! What do you think would happen if B told A that there was a draft, or that there were mandatory vaccinations for swine flu, or that Congress is being lobbied to �pass� a �bill� that robs the citizens blind (�bank bailout�)? Yeah, it�s a pretty funny scenario; almost like a zebra herd walking up to the lion prides to tell the lions to please stop eating them�or, almost like an American in the current situation, where the current American tries to �write their Congressman�. Even non-gun-owning (i.e., non-Constitutional) members of America are not really citizens, in this scheme of this article, and of Jefferson�s lawmaking, and they are at the wretched, disempowered level of B, more than they are of A. So, in summary, there are so many issues we have to fight for, and we need to get more and more aware of all that is going on, but amid everything else we Truthers and Patriots are doing, we may want to think about launching a campaign, with more energy and persistence and passion than anything we have ever done, to fight for this one single issue: a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities, in order to have the chain of events outlined in this Jeffersonian treatise carry out. This is a doable project, since it is a single project, a clear and easy-to-understand project that will make all people feel as empowered as one of the Patriots in the Revolutionary War. Looking at our plight with this issue above all others can give us a means to win this victory against the satanic New World Order, and can give us hope, inspiration, drive, and rebirth, resembling the Minutemen of the Republic. So what do you all thing of this?

TheNocturnalEgyptian | 05-06-2009 03:52 PM
Re: There is One Type of Total Gun Ban that We Need, Here's the problem with that. It'd be like you telling T. Jefferson he isn't allowed to have a gun because he's a member of the government. He'd tell you he's just as free to do so as you are. However your point is well taken about military and police being foreign nationals assembled on foreign soil.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:48 AM. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM