August gun sales were up 15% thanks to Democrats’ totalitarian demands for mandatory buybacks. Those who bought guns were Americans seeking self-protection and with deep concerns that President Donald Trump is on board with gun control.
Trump Looks At A Social Credit Score For Gun Owners?
According to the Washington Examiner, the overall number of background checks recorded in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System surged 15.5%. Those numbers were courtesy of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). That figure includes background checks done for security, concealed carry permits, and gun sales and was the highest August number ever recorded.
Adjusted for sales, the NSSF industry group said that August FBI background checks for sales surged 15.2% over August 2018. The adjusted August number was second only to August 2016 during the heated presidential election. It’s become evident that gun control authoritarians are the best gun salespeople on the planet.
Trump’s rhetoric on guns and his apparent desire to curb the gun rights of innocent people is likely also playing a role in the increase in gun sales. The new surge came in the wake of heightened pressure for gun control, sales bans on “military-style rifles,” limits on ammo, and a slew of democrats saying they will take guns at the end of a gun, but force.
Communist Vows He IS Coming For Your Guns
Justin Anderson, the marketing director for Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, North Carolina, one of the nation’s largest sellers, said fears of a liberal gun grab and a drive for self-protection are pushing sales higher.
“As we’ve seen in the past, the recent publicizing of mass shootings has fueled people’s concerns about their personal safety. We are seeing many first-time gun buyers, and our concealed carry classes are booking up quickly,” said Anderson.
“Political figures talking about gun bans and confiscation is also starting to figure into sales. We’ve seen a slight uptick in the sale of tactical rifles as a result,” he added. –Washington Examiner
Democrats Made AR-15 Popular: Gun Sales “Driven By The Ban Concept”
Democrats continue to prove themselves to be the best people to drive up gun sales. They are literally making their goal of an enslaved populace harder by spewing propaganda seconds after a mass shooting. It looks like innocent people don’t like being told they aren’t allowed to protect themselves and considering the second amendment was written to protect Americans from tyrants, it makes sense that democrats want it gone, while free people stock up.
Is Trump going to become a gun salesman in the same sense as Obama and Clinton? Let’s hope not. Most of the time increases in gun sales is due to the libturds’ usual rhetoric on gun control. I’m still looking at one more purchase myself. All the libturds can kiss my ass.
DR, there still time to get what you want. The old man running the senate ain’t gonna go for this crap. It’ll probably start a flaming war in congress but who gives a flying shit. The tick-turds in the house can do all they want but at the end of the day they’re gonna get their asses handed to them. If you feel you need to buy something to hedge your bets then get more ammo.
Reper sleeper, thanks for that. I’m still stackin’ ammo and everything else. I’m looking at .308/7.62×51, possibly an M1A. And even then I’ll need extra mags and ammo. If/when confiscation attempts start it will be game on. A would-be gun grabber will have a much shorter life span than a repo man.
Dude, get an fal.
Cheaper than m1a, and better all around.
Excellent choice.
the more you think about it I believe the NRA is behind these gun attacks so they sell more guns what a great game plan
Capitalism at its best
The NRA doesn’t sell guns.
HEY STUPID FUCK! YA! YOU ANONYMOUS. THE NRA DOESNT SELL GUNS, YOU DIPSHIT.
And we have a winner for the dumbest comment of the day!
To date nothing has changed!!! Trump said he would consider it and as of today the whole push is losing steam once again. If Trump had come out against it than they would still be pushing. Trump did this to derail the gun control movement. There is a method to his madness!!!!
These stupid bastuds (the left and a few of the right) think they have got it all figured out. LMAO!
Quite frankly I’m not as worried about bans or “universal background checks” as most people won’t comply.
What I find offensive is the “red flag laws” that about 17 states have legalized. Those laws violates the constitution by eliminating due process, depriving you of your property, and disarming you, just on the say-so of somebody that may just dislike or are angry with you. Kind of like “SWATTING”.
They can send cops out to confiscate your guns without notice. You then have to prove you’re “OK”, incur significant legal fees, and take several months to get your guns back. That is just plain wrong.
It will take years to get this stuff to the Supreme court.
Democrats are just trying to tie everybody up in court in the mean time.
Rellik, agreed that most people won’t comply with any bans or universal background checks. Me neither but I won’t comply with any red flag law either. The basis for the law is totally illegitimate since there is no burden of proof on whoever is making a complaint. I’ve heard you can’t even get any information about the complaint. It all amounts to being penalized over something unknown and unproven. Woe unto whoever comes after my shit. I won’t play that game.
The problem is, individuals cannot access the background check system by law. Just like the HIPAA laws, it is illegal to release personal information to the public. Universal background checks will effectively outlaw private sales.
What’s interesting is many of the states have a set of “mental health” intervention laws. I can’t speak to the red flag or mental health laws in other states, but in Florida we have a “Baker Act”, which allows the police, or a medical professional, to have a person taken (involuntarily) to a mental facility for 72 hours if that person represents a danger to himself or others. Then, there are required evaluations and specified hearings before a judge (the judge goes to the facility) for extensions. The rights of the individual are well laid out. So, without red flag laws, there was a means to defuse dangerous people. Of course, as was demonstrated in several shootings, the existing legal procedures were not followed. Whose fault is that? That lousy creep (dishonor to the title) sheriff in Broward wanted to be anti gun, but did nothing when all the signs existed.
It begs the question, what were the red flag laws for? Answer? They just want a simple way to target guns without accountability. Leftist activists tried, and will try again, to make the Concealed Weapon license holder database public record. Then the same activists likely will make anonymous reports. No recourse for the false reports, though that rarely happens anyway (ask any divorce lawyer).
Going Gray is the best advice.
The Red Flag Law gambit on the part of Leftists is an interesting twist on Alinsky’s Rule #4 – “Make the Enemy Live Up to its own Book of Rules.”
They pass these onerous, clearly Un-Constitutional Laws and then point to them for us 2A proponents and say “There, there Bubba, these are the Rules duly passed by your elected officials, and y’all who are a big RoL supporters HAVE to obey what is now (gag) ‘…your own Book of Rules’ ”
Meanwhile, we regular folks are trying to get the judicial process moving forward with our $ donated to whoever we think can burn that sucker down in the courts as quickly as it can happen.
And the carnage and injustice will roll over whoever gets in the way in the mean time until (years later) the SCOTUS eventually strikes it down (we hope).
<bb
BB, once a certain number of would-be gun grabbers get killed, they’ll back off. The red flag laws will get people on both sides killed.
There is an odd self-contradiction in saying that a democracy is two wolves and a sheep, deciding what to have for dinner, and that all three should have the power over life and death, at the press of a button. The Republic is supposedly a safeguard against mob rule. If they don’t like it, dictatorship of the proletariat. They call that ‘direct democracy’.
“I’m a Black American and I know that the NRA was started as a civil rights organization training Black Americans to arm themselves and defend themselves against the KKK,” Owens claimed. (The KKK against South African style Reconstruction.)
Inarticulate rap battle about war powers:
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8
Public schools are named after this:
h ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe_of_Shabazz
Was someone run off their land, some time between the civil rights era and present year?
An anarchist group uses the plastic printer to make guns for the homeless, with no questions asked, of which we are aware.
Synthetic marijuana mass overdose:
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSuyYWXbdxk
I believe that the Republicans were capital, and the Democrats were labor, in a plantation system, that was justified as a workhouse for the displaced. This was a reciprocal arrangement.
Today’s crisis housing and diversity hires were a logical progression of the same exact system.
All they would have to do is reinstate production quotas, to in-source the labor; it’s liberal charity.
America is stopping the One World Oder from taking control of the world’s governments.
First they need to get out guns – then they can bring us down in a number of ways. I am concerned that they will pull something out
Like a black swan to get them.
If the NWO types hang back another twenty years.. They can get the guns… To many folks raised as morons now. In twenty the majority of Vietnam vets and folks in the 50s and up will be almost gone also. 90% sheep after twenty years …
I tend to agree with you.
They have been at it a long long time what’s 20 more years.
Vietnam combat action for the US ended January 1973 and from 1971 on ground operations were significantly reduced and given to the ARVN forces. About the youngest Vietnam vet to see any combat would be 67 years of age and that would be very few. A handful were there for the evacuation of April 1975 and some accidents occurred. I know of no US v NVA fighting at that time. The Mayaguez incident of May 1975 was included in the Vietnam war casualties.
Vietnam combat Vets are largely 70 years of age now.
My concealed carry class registrations for September are over triple the registrations last September. Huge demand for classes.
Maryland State Police News Release
Maryland Wear And Carry Permit Application Process Goes Online Beginning October 1, 2019:
‘Beginning Oct. 1, 2019, those applying for a Maryland Wear And Carry Permit will complete and submit the application online. Individuals will be able to apply online using a computer, tablet or mobile phone, regardless of the operating system. …
Paper Wear And Carry Permit applications postmarked or hand delivered on or before Sept. 30, 2019, will be accepted and will be processed as per current procedures. …
https://news.maryland.gov/msp/2019/09/10/maryland-wear-and-carry-permit-application-process-goes-online-beginning-october-1-2019/
Red Flag Law require opsec. Keep you mouth shut, lose the pro gun and political bumper stickers. Never talk to strangers about guns, prepping or politics. Even well meaning like minded friends can blab to much.
If no one knows you have a firearm, why would naughty neighbors Red Flag You. Buy some Airsoft guns to practice at home. You may need to continue to practice firearms skills during SHTF, without using valuable ammo or quietly without anyone taking notice. If someone thinks you have a firearm, show them your Airsoft gun and say you mean this toy?
Don’t forget a SHTF supply of ammo.
Consider going gray long before the world realized leftist politicians won their coup.
Hey Mac, when innocent Americans continue to die from gun violence on an industrial scale, we will blame people like you.
Peter- People are not dieing on an industrial scale…yet.
Mass shootings are glorified by the presstitutes to tug at the heartstrings of the simple minded. If the number of people killed each week in liberal strongholds like Chicago were given the same media attention, I doubt folks would be nearly as concerned.
We have seen industrial scale gun violence in societies where gun confiscation occured. Read undiluted history.
Keeping guns out of the hands of warped people should be the priority, not limiting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
Good ,stock up while you can !
Different Slave Master, same Plantation. We are clingers. We cling to liberty-destroying Republicans. We cling to the idea of saving land masses full of Commies. We cling to a system clearly designed to reduce us to absolute Despotism.
Irreconcilable differences are well, irreconcilable. We need a divorce. The only vote that ever mattered in history is that of secession. If they pursue we fight them on our soil in our time.
Secession was the most powerful, nation-altering vote ever made. The federal gov’t could not tolerate a diminishing of their territory or power, which they deemed more important than the Constitutional rights of citizens and States. There is no violent act, there is no resource spared, no freedom it won’t regulate, no moral limit it won’t violate, and no numbers of death it won’t incur, that gov’t will not do to maintain its authoritarian control. Gov’t largely refuses to recognize citizens as sovereign persons possessing inviolable individual rights; but rather, as mere subjects, subordinate to its statist decrees.
The only passive way now available to citizens to find greater personal freedoms and individual rights is to vote with their feet. Get the hell out of those states (which are also high tax states) that limit rights, and take your wealth and assets with you. Just before you cross the state line be sure to stop and piss on its ground.
Triple Amen! Secessions now! It’s the only way. The sooner the less damage there will be, it can be done relatively clean right now, why wait for the scorched earth scenario.
WE are who we’ve been waiting for, US people. Real men can do this, why bow to a bunch of nerdy, pimply faced, millennial, skinny jeans wearing, man bunned socialists? They are posers. Seceed now!
Get your guns and ammo….you might need it sooner than you think. Aim well!
My Thoughts On:
Civilian Disarmament
By Jerry D Young
I have posted my thoughts on Civilian Disarmament several times. But I have revised it recently, so I will post it again.
With the newest changes in the US power structure, the likelihood of the subject of Civilian Disarmament is likely to come up time and time again in the near future. Here are some of the ways I address the issue when it comes up and I am in a position to respond and give my thoughts on the subject.
1) I never, ever, refer to any discussion, comment, or other situation where weapons are referenced by any term other than Civilian Disarmament. For I believe wholeheartedly that the goal of people that tend to bring it up is just that. Civilian Disarmament.
No matter what term they use, I use Civilian Disarmament in every reply, all through any discussion that might take place. I DO NOT use any of ‘their’ terms. Because that allows them to disseminate information and ideas that are misleading, do not actually pertain to the subject, are often outright lies, and tend to have very strong emotional links to the word, words, or phrases that distract from the actual discussion of what they want to do.
Not ‘gun control’. Not ‘reasonable efforts’. Not ‘for the children’. Not ‘crime control’. Not ‘reducing gun deaths’. Not ‘gun safety efforts’. Not ‘simply …’ anything. Not ‘only …’ anything. Not ‘reducing gun violence’. Not ‘militia …’ anything. Not ‘regulation’. Not ‘homicide reduction’. Not ‘suicide reduction’. Not ‘limited …’ anything. Not ‘The second amendment no longer applies’.
Well, I could go on and on and on and… But I will stop here. The point is that I will not use their terms. Terms for which they have applied definitions that often have literally no connection or similarity to classic dictionary definitions of the words.
So, basically, if I am in the discussion it is a discussion about Civilian Disarmament whether it started as such or not. And though it is very difficult at times, I always try to use the word weapons, as opposed to guns. Because Civilian Disarmament does include taking effective weapons of all types from civilians, not just modern firearms. Black powder weapons, swords, spears, all the way down to even kitchen knives in places.
2) Any discussion, to be a discussion, whether it be verbal, written, or visual, should be conducted with courtesy, with respect for the other person’s opinion, without interrupting the other person (no matter how large the temptation), and two-way. No preaching, no demands, no ‘I am right and you are wrong’, no angry gestures, with each person being allowed to speak, in turn, and then allowed to speak again, in turn, to address what was said each time.
I will not argue, especially a yelling match. It solves nothing and puts me in a bad light even for those that support my opinion. I intend to lead the way, provided the example, and be that person that others will actually listen to and take away something rather than just shutting it all out, which means I will have accomplished nothing.
3) I make it personal. No, NOT calling a person names, not denigrating their intelligence or ancestors. Not using derogatory versions of political party names, group names, organization names, other peoples’ names, or anything with which they identify.
All that does is get them angry, causes them to rant and rave in return, and totally destroys any chance of exchanging actual information and providing them with information that they might just look at, and think about. They definitely will not consider anything you might suggest if it is accompanied with vitriolic accusations and derogatory comments.
What I am talking about is make the subject, and especially individual points of the discussion personal to the person with whom you are talking. Use their first name if you know it, and that is not already an objectionable thing to do for them, and if not, simply use the word ‘you’, or ‘your’, with slight emphasis on it each time.
This will hopefully allow them to see that Civilian Disarmament IS NOT about ‘the other guy’, the bad person, the person with ‘too many’ weapons, ‘the wrong kind’ of weapons, or some other ‘person’ only. It is about them as well. Everything that they want others to do and rules to abide by, they will, as well. And they often do not think about that. Not even consider it. Since they are not a gun owner, nor want to be.
The list below is the core of what I do. I ask the questions, as I said, always using the slightly emphasized ‘you’ word or variation as needed. This will cause them to think about things in ways they probably have not considered. Often the person is scared, or worried, or even just concerned, and has listened to the rhetoric put out by those attempting to disarm all civilians. Civilians. As in everyone that is not one of their own elite group, and usually police, military, and certain other ‘special’ people that they believe should have the advantages that having effective weapons available give them.
They believe that they are one of ‘them’ and not one of ‘us’, until many of these things are pointed out.
So, on with the list and additional comments at the end:
With emotions running high because of recent events, and many snap decisions being made by people in positions of power, I thought I might pass along some information and some of my thoughts on the subject at hand, so people that might not have been exposed to some of the included information will now have a chance to make decisions based on a more complete base of knowledge.
I would ask that anyone reading this not take my word for any of it, but do their own due diligence research into the thoughts that I will be expressing. To learn, on your own, if what I am asking and suggesting is true, or is not true.
This first part is a set of ‘Gun Control’ poll questions, more appropriately called Civilian Disarmament poll questions, that I think should be included in any and all polls relating in any way to the restriction of US Citizens from exercising their God given moral and legal right to acquire, own, possess, keep, bear, and use arms, as expressed in the US Constitution’s Second Amendment.
I have found that many polls presented to the public are asking for results that are essentially about ‘the other person’, not really indicating that the disarmament would apply to the person taking the poll, as well as ‘the other person’. Take this poll with yourself and your family in mind. See if you are or are not in one of the groups that will be exempt from being forcibly disarmed.
1) In a gun-free zone, where there is no one around to return fire, and an active shooter with a semi-auto rifle fires all 210 rounds of his/her ammunition: Are 210 rounds in 7 30-round magazines more dangerous than 210 rounds in 14 15-round magazines or 210 rounds in 21 10-round magazines? Yes/No
2) In that scenario, do YOU think is it better for the shooter to A) fire off those 210 rounds rapidly and wildly, because they are in 30-round magazines and they feel they have plenty? Or B) much more slowly, taking careful aim, because they only have 10 rounds at a time before they have to reload? A/B
3) Considering the number of shootings that have taken place in areas labeled “Gun Free Zone” do YOU feel safer in Gun Free Zones than in areas where regular people licensed to carry concealed weapons, or people that open carry weapons where legal are or may be armed? Yes/No
4) Are YOU willing to be unarmed in a society where only ‘official’ people can have firearms? Yes/No
5) Will YOU feel safer if a new Assault Weapons Ban is enacted? Yes/No
6) Do YOU think YOUR family will be safer if YOU are denied gun ownership? Yes/No
7) Are YOU capable of defending YOURSELF and YOUR family without the use of a firearm when confronted by criminals using guns illegally? Yes/No
8) Should YOU be considered a danger to YOUR family or other people if YOU own a gun? Yes/No
9) Are YOU willing to have your home and property searched at will by armed officials searching for illegal firearms? Yes/No
10) Are YOU willing to give up your right to have effective weapons when only ‘official’ people can have them? Yes/No
11) Should public officials be exempt from gun control measures and be allowed to have them when YOU cannot? Yes/No
12) Are a public official’s children more entitled to be protected than YOUR children and have armed security in their schools when YOU cannot have the same? Yes/No
13) Should ‘celebrities and important people’ be exempt from gun control measures and be allowed to have them when YOU cannot? Yes/No
14) Should public officials, ‘celebrities’, and ‘important people’ have personal guards that are exempt from gun control measures YOU must follow? Yes/No
15) Is the safety of public officials, ‘celebrities’, and ‘important people’ and their families more important than YOUR safety and YOUR family’s safety? Yes/No
16) Do YOU know someone ‘special’ that should be exempt from the gun laws that YOU are required to follow? Yes/No
17) Are YOU one of the ‘special people’ that should be exempt from the gun laws that others must follow? Yes/No
18) Should those that advocate gun control for YOU be exempt from the law that YOU must follow? Yes/No
19) Should those that advocate gun control for YOU be allowed to have firearms until everyone else is disarmed? Yes/No
20) Do YOU think that most of those in public office are ‘special’ and therefore more qualified than YOU to make decisions about YOUR safety and the safety of YOUR family? Yes/No
21) Do YOU think that people wishing to use firearms in crimes will give up their guns during a gun ban? Yes/No
22) Do YOU think that criminals WILL NOT be able to get firearms by theft or illegal sale when some people are exempt from gun laws, but YOU are required to give up YOURS? Yes/No
23) Are those that support rigid gun control laws and advocate the gunning down or burning alive NRA members and other gun owners hypocritical in their thinking? Yes/No
24) Should YOU have a firearm, because YOU are not a danger with one and everyone else not have one because only YOU are not a danger with one? Yes/No
25) Are YOU mentally incompetent to own and legally use a firearm because you seek help for SOME mental issues such as depression and take the prescribed medication as directed? Yes/No
26) If YOU are being treated for depression and taking the medication, if any, as directed, and therefore more mentally sound with the correct chemical balance, are YOU a bigger risk than those not taking anything or seeking help that leaves them with an untreated chemical imbalance? Yes/No
27) Are YOU incompetent to own and use a firearm because you have minor mental issues that do not involve violence against other people? Yes/No
28) Are YOU competent to decide whether or not YOUR children are introduced to the safe handling of firearms? Yes/No
29) Do YOU think government enforcement agencies should have armed agents? Yes/No
30) Do YOU think administrative and bureaucratic agencies personnel should be armed? Yes/No
31) Do YOU think administrative and bureaucratic agencies should have armed agents as part of the agency? Yes/No
32) If YOU do not own a gun, it was an option YOU chose. Do YOU believe you are better off if that option is taken away from YOU, so YOU no longer have the option to or to not to own a weapon because others believe that YOU are not capable of making the ‘correct’ decision about that option? Yes/No
33) Do YOU think terrorists or people known to be dangerous should have firearms? Yes/No
34) Do YOU consider YOURSELF a terrorist or a danger to others because of your basic beliefs? Yes/No
35) Are YOU a member of one of the following groups, have one of the following beliefs, or engage in one of the following activities that DHS has stated that indicate that YOU are a potential terrorist and a danger to the safety of the nation and should be subject to the no recourse/unlimited incarceration/no contact/no trial/no habeas corpus arrest under the US Patriot Act? Yes/No
1) “Anti-abortion activists”
2) “Anti-Gay”
3) “Anti-Immigrant”
4) “Anti-Muslim”
5) “Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or undesirable”
6) “Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”
7) “General right-wing extremist”
8) “Militia or unorganized militia”
9) “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”
10) “Returning veterans”
11) “Rightwing extremists”
12) “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”
13) “The Patriot Movement”
14) “Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”
15) “Those that advocate for states’ rights
16) “Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”
17) “Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”
18) “Those that talk about “individual liberties”
19) “Those that want “to make the world a better place”
20) Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”
21) Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”
22) Anyone that “complains about bias”
23) Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”
24) Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”
25) Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”
26) Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”
27) Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”
28) Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”
29) Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”
30) Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”
31) Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”
32) Anyone that is “anti-abortion”
33) Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”
34) Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”
35) Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”
36) Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps
37) Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”
38) Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”
39) Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21/Agenda 2030
40) Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”
41) Christians that have ever discussed the anti-Christ
42) Christians that have ever discussed the apocalypse
43) Christians that have ever discussed the book of Revelation?
44) Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.
45) Constitution party members
46) Evangelical Christians
47) Fundamental Christians
48) Gun owners
49) Libertarian party members
50) Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol
51) Members of the American Family Association
52) Members of the Christian Action Network
53) Members of the Family Research Council
54) Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform
55) Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition
56) People advocating a decentralized government
57) People distrustful of the DHS See Something, Say Something campaign
58) People driving vans
59) People involved in the Patriot Movement
60) People or groups that seek to smite the purported enemies of God and other evildoers
61) People showing an interest in web privacy when using the Internet in a public place
62) People talking to police officers
63) People that are involved with alternative media
64) People that believe in a New World Order and/or Agenda 21/2030 conspiracy
65) People that believe in civil liberties
66) People that believe in homeschooling
67) People that believe in their Constitutional rights
68) People that express an interest in self-sufficiency
69) People that express libertarian philosophies
70) People that express second Amendment-oriented views
71) People that fear economic collapse
72) People that have ever expressed concerns of Big Brother
73) People that have expressed agreement with Constitutional rights and civil liberties
74) People that have expressed fears of Big Brother or big government
75) People that have religious views concerning the book of Revelation
76) People that listen to, watch, or read alternative media
77) People that oppose abortion
78) People that oppose illegal immigration
79) People that possess survivalist literature
80) People that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority
81) People using a cell phone recording application
82) People using a video camera in public places
83) People wearing hoodies
84) People who “believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threats to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.”
85) People who buy food in bulk
86) People who consider themselves “anti-global”
87) People who disagree with the mass media’s version of events
88) People who display bumper stickers
89) People who fly a U.S. flag
90) People who oppose giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants
91) People who own gold
92) People who pay cash for a cup of coffee
93) People writing on a piece of paper in public
94) Ron Paul supporters
95) The militia movement
96) The sovereign citizen movement
97) Those concerned about “illegal immigration”
98) Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”
99) Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”
100) Those that “do not think they should have to pay taxes”
101) Those that are “anti-global”
102) Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”
103) Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”
104) Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”
105) Those that are against illegal immigration
106) Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”
107) Those that believe in “end times” prophecies
108) Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union”
109) Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Do not Tread On Me”)
110) Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”
111) Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”
112) Those that have a negative view of the United Nations
113) Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”
114) Those that refer to an “Army of God”
115) Those that support Libertarian concepts
116) Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr
117) Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner
118) Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”
119) Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”
120) Those who are “fiercely nationalistic (rather than universal and international in orientation)”
121) Those who are “reverent of individual liberty”
122) Those who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”
123) Those who believe their “way of life” is under attack
124) Veterans
36) Do YOU believe, that even if government jurisdictions, from city governments all the way up to all three branches of the Federal government, are not currently tyrannical in nature, that there are individuals, and groups of individuals, within the governments that do act in ways that are tyrannical, that overstep their legal authority, that use heavy handed tactics, to achieve some agenda that they believe in, even if the government in general does not? Yes/No
37) Do YOU think that these people in government that are trying to implement their own agenda, with or without the general assistance or knowledge of others within the government, and use force of arms to achieve some part of that agenda, are a danger to YOU and YOUR family due to your beliefs and your expression of your beliefs? Yes/No
38) Are YOU able to protect YOURSELF and YOUR family from these people if they, by intent or accident, attack you with weapons if you do not have weapons of YOUR own? Yes/No
39) Since these people are some of those that will legally be allowed to possess weapons of many sorts, often including military ordnance, when Civilian Disarmament has begun, are YOU willing to stand up, unarmed, to protest their actions when they violate some law you disagree with? Yes/No
40) If Civilian Disarmament occurs, do YOU think that these, for lack of a better term, JBTs (Jack Booted Thugs), sanctioned or not, will be more likely to start taking action arbitrarily to achieve their agenda, and continue to do so no matter what the rest of the government suggests or orders them to do, since they will be some of those that legally have weapons, and those that would stop them do not? Yes/No
41) Given the reality of JBTs in the future (and even now in some instances), do YOU feel that YOU and YOUR family will be safe from anything they might do, if YOU are disarmed? Yes/No
42) Are YOU willing to permanently give up YOUR other rights, and YOUR families’ other rights, when ordered to do so in support of Civilian Disarmament, as part of the necessary actions to ensure that Civilian Disarmament can be achieved with the fewest losses to the LEOs and JBTs and government officials that will be enforcing it? Yes/No
43) Currently, if YOU do not own a gun, it was an option YOU chose. Do YOU believe you are better off if that option is taken away from YOU, so YOU no longer have the option to or to not to own a weapon because others believe that YOU are not capable of making the ‘correct’ decision about that option? Yes/No
44) Do YOU think YOU are capable of making up YOUR own mind about any subject, not just Civilian Disarmament? Yes/No
45) Do YOU think YOU should only read, watch, and listen to Main Stream Media sources to get information about what is happening around you? Yes/No
46) Do YOU think other sources of information and news should be controlled by the government? Yes/No
47) Do YOU think that online services should have the power to arbitrarily restrict, demonetize, or otherwise keep alternative news and information sources from providing their services and opinions while allowing other sources to continue, when the only difference being the different social, political, or other beliefs being expressed, with no criminal or other rule violations taking place? Yes/No
48) Do YOU think YOU are capable of making up YOUR own mind about any subject, not just Civilian Disarmament? Yes/No
49) Do YOU think YOU should only read, watch, and listen to Main Stream Media sources to get information about what is happening around you? Yes/No
50) Do YOU think other sources of information and news should be controlled by the government? Yes/No
51) Do YOU think that online services should have the power to arbitrarily restrict, demonetize, or otherwise keep alternative news and information sources from providing their services and opinions while allowing other sources to continue, when the only difference being the different social, political, or other beliefs being expressed, with no criminal or other rule violations taking place? Yes/No
52) Do YOU think that those that oppose people having weapons, and have chosen to not own them, but have always had that option, and exercised that option freely understand that if Civilian Disarmament comes about, they will have no choice in the matter. An option will be taken from them, in the form of losing one of the primary aspects of being free, the right to keep and bear arms. Do YOU think that those people are going to simply accept the fact that they can no longer make a choice to own or to not own a gun, but are being ordered to, and informed at the end of a gun that owning a gun is not a choice? Yes/No
53) Do YOU remember from YOUR school years, using the textbooks of the time, and not the new ones now being printed and distributed, about how every totalitarian regime that has ever existed, has disarmed it citizens, so they become subjects, and are unable to defend themselves effectively when that regime began to control them more and more tightly, leading, ultimately, to killing everyone that did not fit their ideal of a perfect subject under their elite leadership? Yes/No
54) Whether YOU believe it will happen or not, how would YOU defend YOURSELF, YOUR family, and YOUR beliefs if our government DID become totalitarian, and YOU had given up YOUR right to own an effective weapon to combat the abuses of such a government, whether YOU own one now or not? Or would YOU submit to whatever YOU are instructed to do, and force YOUR family to submit to whatever those in authority say they must do? Yes/No
55) Could YOU and would YOU take up farming tools to fight tanks and attack helicopters and heavily armed troops to protect what you believe in? Yes/No
56) Do YOU, or do YOU think anyone else, really expects the Federal Government to “control” millions of guns, AND protect 350,000,000 unarmed ‘subjects’ (and I say subjects because we will no longer be citizens), and themselves at the same time, without the support and assistance of 50,000,000 or more former gun owners that are trying to find ways to defend their families against both the real terrorist, as well as our own government agents doing no-knock warrants, because they know there will be people that will not turn in their guns? Yes/No
57) And do YOU know just how many times SWAT and/or Assault Teams have hit the wrong house and killed the wrong dog, not to mention its owner? Multiply that percentage to 10s of millions of no-knocks. Do you think Civilian Disarmament will lessen gun deaths AND other crime related deaths? Yes/No
58) Are YOU really aware that when they are talking about Civilian Disarmament, they are talking about YOU? Not just me and another guy, but YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. Believe me, if YOU are not part of the few thousand elite, YOU will be disarmed as well, at gun point, YOUR person, YOUR vehicle, and YOUR house, storage room, gym locker, and back yard thoroughly searched. Possibly at 3 in the morning with a no-knock warrant. Are YOU willing to put YOURSELF and all members of YOUR family through that degrading process? Yes/No
59) YOU do not even have a gun, YOU say? Well, when the rewards start going up for turning in YOUR neighbors, and YOU have even one person that dislikes YOU, YOU will get that no-knock visit, because YOU lied about having a weapon, and therefore are a ‘domestic terrorist’ and LEOs cannot risk not doing it that way because it just MIGHT be true, since no one would lie about their neighbor over something petty. Do YOU know anyone that might turn YOU in for having a weapon when YOU do not have one, but want to get YOU in serious trouble, simply because they do not like YOU, or YOUR family, or want something YOU have? Yes/No
60) So, are YOU and YOUR family ready to start looking over your shoulder all the time, because they will be coming after YOU AND YOUR FAMILY for something, at some point, that YOU do, that the elite does not want happening. Like going to a Christian or Jewish church in more than groups of 2 or 3. Or grow a garden. Or complain about the inappropriate handling of YOUR 13-year-old daughter when searched for concealed weapons. And of course, it had to be a full body cavity strip search, just to keep EVERYONE safe. Are YOU in favor of being in situations? Yes/No
61) And since it will be way too late before Main Stream Media realizes that not only are YOU being targeted, and they have been ordered not to report it, but that since THEY are no longer needed for disinformation, THEY are now being targeted, so cannot warn YOU, YOU will never see it coming, except for warnings like this. Is that the way YOU want to be notified about the real results of what a ‘reasonable’ Civilian Disarmament program will be? Yes/No
62) And if I am still around (not likely, of course, after this), I will gladly remind everyone that I TOLD YOU SO.
Just my opinion.
“Tiocfaidh Ar LA”, gallic for “Our Day Will Come!
Gun sales up 15%?
I’ve just learned a sales strategy. Actually it reminds me of a sales strategy I learned years ago.
We were taught that if a customer put up too many objections, just refuse to allow him to do business. People want what they can’t have. People being threatened with the loss of something will make them want it even more.
I remember when I was kept from doing homework because of household chores imposed upon me. Suddenly I actually wanted to do my homework. I was amazed at how quickly my resistance to cracking my books open became when I was being informed that I was not going to be allowed to study.
The best way to make people lose interest in guns would be to make them easy to obtain and use; like they were in the 1950s and 60s.
.
Americans buy loads of guns…But they are not buying ammo…The average amount of ammunition a gun owner in the USA holds is under 100 rounds….What is the point of buying a gun if you are not over the top supplied in ammunition?
Seemo,
I don’t even have any ammo for my guns, I mean pellet gun!!!!!