Gun Control Accomplishes Exactly What Governments Want It To Do

ScreenHunter_1725 Aug. 06 22.54

ScreenHunter_1739 Aug. 07 07.33

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Gun Control Accomplishes Exactly What Governments Want It To Do

  1. That’s how the Dutch got rid of the Chinese from Jakarta in 1740. The told them to surrender all their guns and knives, “down to the smallest kitchen knife”. The next day they killed 10,000 Chinese.

  2. Bob Greene says:

    And you moved to such a gun friendly state.

  3. bobmaginnis says:

    Most of my progressive friends and I are against gun control, are against the creeping police state.
    “Down through history, governments have disarmed their citizens only to tyrannize those citizens once they were disarmed…..”

  4. nielszoo says:

    That would be why the Founders of our Republic, which is not a Democracy, included the protection of the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms. A Democracy is 3 wolves and 2 sheep deciding what’s for dinner, a Republic is 3 wolves and 2 armed sheep deciding what’s for dinner. Why do so many folks in this country have a problem understanding that? (Oh yea, Public Education and Teacher’s Unions… I knew it was something inane.)

    • Jason Calley says:

      “Why do so many folks in this country have a problem understanding that?”

      Like you, I am amazed and mystified how seemingly intelligent people do not see the plain facts. Disarmed civilians are genocide bait. If anyone asks, “Give me one reason why someone needs to own an assault weapon!” then tell them this: “The European Jews can give you six million reasons. Oh, wait, no they can’t… Or maybe you don’t think their reasons count…”

      • Gail Combs says:


        The Ukrainians can give an additional 7,000,000 reasons.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Yes, and who even remembers the ten million Congolese killed by the Belgians?

          There is a reason why ranchers raise sheep instead of porcupines.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Or tigers or lions or even elephants.

          Most elephants in the USA have killed at least one person though you will only find that out from elephant handlers. And forget trying to get accidental death insurance.

          Elephant handler is rated as the top most dangerous occupation or at least in the top five (Again from the elephant handlers I know.) Cop is way down there below taxi cab driver and other professional drivers.

          Fisherman, Loggers, Farmers and Ranchers all are consider more dangerous occupations by insurance companies that being a cop. Elephant handlers aren’t even mentioned.


      • rah says:

        My first response to that question would be: Please define an “assault weapon”?

        I know what an “assault rifle” is, even if the gun grabbers don’t. All assault rifles have selective fire that includes at a minimum a 3 rd automatic burst capability.

        The reality is that when the gun grabbers came up with that made up designation of “assault weapon” it had to do with any firearm having a detachable box magazine or “clip”, raised sites, a bayonet stud, pistol grip, flash suppressor and such. They had to make it up because it became common knowledge that assault rifles do have full automatic capabilities. But those that spout such a term to describe a firearm or firearm types generally don’t know that stuff.

        BTW I notice that the US Army is once again reinventing the wheel and getting rid of their Baretta 9 mm (M9 and M11) as the standard issue firearm for regular forces for an as yet selected weapon that will be a minimum of a .40 cal.

        In about 1985 some bone heads decided that the US Army needed to adopt a 9mm caliber semiautomatic pistol for it’s standard service firearm. Remember the cold war was still going on and it was decided that since virtually all the European allies in NATO used semiautomatic pistols chambered for 9mm it made sense for ease of supply and standardization the US should adopt a pistol of the same caliber. Never mind that any person with any experience using the 9mm knows that it simply is not as effective round as the .45 because it does not have the stopping power.

        We in SF never gave up our M1911A1s for those Berettas. We knew better but almost all the other front line troops in the Army were issued the Beretta because they didn’t have a choice. And later SOCOM did some heavy lifting in testing various large caliber automatic pistols for special ops use. In regular forces the side arm is used as a personal protection weapon generally but in special ops there are times a pistol is the primary weapon used in room clearing and CQB.

        I guess I’m old school. I think that .45 ACP is about as good as it gets for a general purpose round though admittedly one has to go smaller for a really handy concealed carry pistol . I have my old Black Talon rounds loaded in my Glock 21 for personal protection. My wife is small and she has a stainless steel five shot Taurus with .38 special revolver with gel tips in it for hers.

  5. Ralph says:

    All the reasons stated are real.

  6. rah says:

    Notice as it gets closer to election time the hubub about “gun control” is kind of dying down. I expected a tremendous reaction from the left when this ruling came down last week.

    But mum is pretty much the word it seems since they know that “gun control” is a losing issue in the majority of sane states in this country.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s