People control

As if there was any doubt that “gun control” is just a misnomer for people control, we have more evidence of the new direction on the part of the disarmers of lawful Americans. That direction is Soviet-style punitive psychiatry as well as a vast expansion of the category of “prohibited persons” through retroactive addition of punishments to old convictions.

Forget about AR15 rifles! The single-shot Crickett above would be off limits to anyone who gets disqualified, even if the disqualification happens in a commie state like New Jersey and the victim of the process later moves to Idaho or Montana. The newest Federal efforts are in line with the 1938 Nazi law changes which made gun ownership nominally less restrictive for the general population but designated politically motivated categories of prohibited persons — precisely the people who were later gassed or shot by German troops and police.


This entry was posted in civil rights, rifle, rkba, self-defense, weapon and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to People control

  1. Lyle says:

    I think more people are beginning to wake up to the true nature of the enemy, but I wonder how many. Certainly the tactics involve isolating us, making us think that we’re in a minority, and making us uncomfortable in speaking out.

    The fact is that W.W. II and the Cold War never ended. The enemy simply retreated, reevaluated, re-branded, infiltrated and reorganized.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Oh, this has been going on for a while. Theodor Adorno, whose gushing Wikipedia page mysteriously fails to mention that he was a Communist and an enthusiastic defender of Stalin, Mao, Kim Il-Sung, and Ho Chi Minh, was writing books and essays like “The Authoritarian Personality” in which he basically said that anyone who isn’t a Communist has a “psychological predilection for fascism” and claimed to be able to measure this trait with a test called the “F-Scale,” back just after the Second World War. Ponder the irony here. Note also that he was one of the inventors of the pseudoscience called “sociology.”

    But let’s continue. Back in the 1990s, lots and lots of “scholarly” papers were appearing on the Internet in all fields, including psychology. Let’s pause here and use our favorite search engines to look for information about “counterdependency.” Copy and paste the word. You will see that for twenty years now, papers have been written arguing, apparently seriously and with no sense of irony, that being a mature adult, holding down a job instead of being on welfare, and taking care of oneself and one’s responsibilities is a personality disorder and they want very much to put it in the next version of the DSM as a symptom of “mental illness,” perhaps even as a mental illness itself: “counterdependent personality disorder.”

    And now you can use that same search engine you used previously to search for information about the current fad in using pseudoscience to pathologize inconvenient political beliefs, by searching for the words “conservatism” + “autism.” It seems that these bold theoreticians have now decided that “autism,” which was fifty years ago a vanishingly rare disorder affecting fewer than one in ten thousand children, is so loosely and vaguely defined as to make a fourth of the adult population “autistic,” if not more, and that “right-wingers” have an “autistic spectrum disorder” characterized by “lack of empathy.” Apparently objecting to having one’s pocket picked at the point of a government bayonet to subsidize other people’s bad life choices is a mental illness now. Who knew?

    Official Truth holds that anyone who’s reading this is in all likelihood mentally ill, and should report to your nearest MINILUV blockwarden at once. “We’re from the government, and we’re here to help you.”

  3. Fakia says:

    Collectivists, be they leftist or conservative, have always been with us. They hide the violence of their intent until they get a bit of power and then it always shows through. We’re seeing a resurgence of it on both sides of the aisle these days, which is why the GOP has so many gun grabbers like Romney and Christie and is acting just like the Democrats.

    The really sad part is people seem not to realize it.

  4. Awtha says:

    Oh come, come, now; you can’t blame the troops and police . . . . ve where only following orders! “Befehl ist Befehl!”

    🙂 Have a nice day! (-:

    • Paul Koning says:

      Along those lines: I realized that the wording of the American oath is significant: “…obey all lawful orders…”.
      That obliterates the “Befehl ist Befehl” defense, of course. But more than that: it clearly implies a duty, a requirement, on the part of the person taking the oath to personally judge each order and determine whether it is lawful or not. This is worth remembering, and worth pointing out at the appropriate time.

  5. Pingback: Can we compromise with anti-gun activists? | VolkStudio Blog

  6. Awtha says:

    Well, in part the govt oath says “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States . . . . . I will obey the orders of the POTUS and the orders of the officers appointed over me,. . . . etc. So help me God.” Here is an eye opening experiment for you all. . . . ask that person in uniform if they’ve ever read the constitution or the bill of rights. Shoot, when i wore the uniform – the constitution . . . . whats THAT!? It was a job, & whatever the boss man says in order for us to keep getting our checks is what we gonna do. You are right, it DOES require a duty to judge each order. A “Kapo” will do what a Kapo will do. SELF PRESERVATION Or better put; “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”

Comments are closed.