Categories





Silver Exchange



Feinstein’s Gun Control Bill Will Trigger The Next American Revolution

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military” – William Burroughs

by Brandon Smith, Alt-Market:

Revolution? Yes, it all sounds rather “extreme”, but the cold hard reality of our era is not going to comfort us with diplomacies and niceties, so honestly, why should I have to sugar coat anything? We live in extreme times and there is no longer room for prancing around the ultimate consequences of that which is taking place in America today. This country is increasingly sliding towards the edge of internal conflict. The Liberty Movement and true Constitutionalists see it, subsections of Republicans and Democrats see it, and most of all, the federal government sees it. In fact, they may even be counting on it.

Over the past two years alone, multiple draconian policies have been enacted through executive order by the Obama Administration which build upon the civil liberty crushing actions of George W. Bush and press far beyond. The Patriot Acts, the FISA domestic spy bill, the bailouts of corrupt international banks, attempts at CISPA and SOPA, actions like the NDAA authorizing the treatment of U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants” without rights to due process; all paint a picture so clear only a one-celled amoeba (or your average suburban yuppie) would not see it. You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have been designated potential targets of the state. Our rights have been made forfeit.

Read More @ Alt-Market.com

29 comments to Feinstein’s Gun Control Bill Will Trigger The Next American Revolution

  • hoser

    Alright, here’s the deal, we have 50 govorners with all the power they need to put an end to all this fucking madness. It’s time for them to stand up and say enough is enough.

  • Robin

    Outstanding article! Everyone who values the natural, inherent and primary
    right to self-defense as acknowledged in the Second Amendment should now
    resolve to refuse all future compliance with whatever new gun-control edicts
    issue from Washington. If we must be labeled outlaws for refusing to comply
    with regulations which are ultimately meant to completely disarm the American
    populace, then so be it: Become an outlaw–the Founding Fathers would be deeply
    proud of you!

  • Ed_B

    “Our rights have been made forfeit.”

    No, our rights flow from God Almighty Himself and are not subject to “infringement” by mere government drones. Real Americans CAN live and prosper without a government but we cannot do so without our basic rights and liberties.

    • Toxicosis

      Can you please point out in your scripture/biblical research(citation required) where Americans are provided for in their inalienable rights the right to bear arms. If not you’re a true freakin nutjob.

      • Bob A

        We do know that Peter and the other disciples carried swords. Luke 22:49. I’m sure if they had guns, it would have been guns. The scriptures teach ‘do your best to live at peace with all men.’ Romans 12:18 Key words, do YOUR best. If someone is infringing on my rights, I believe the scriptures teach it is our God given right to bear those arms and protect. Getting back to that scripture over in Luke 22:49, I highly doubt that this was the first time they carried swords. Jesus does say, ‘if you live by the sword, you will die by the sword.’ The key word in that passage is ‘live.’ I’m not living by the sword or gun, the thief or criminal is, I’m just protecting myself, lovely wife and 2 precious children from them! Jesus told Peter to put his sword away after cutting off Malchus ear because it was the will of the Father that he should suffer and die in the manner laid out in the O.T. So yes, I believe it is our God given right to protect ourselves…with arms if necessary!!

        • Toxicosis

          You seem to be obviously “sure” of a great many things here. You assume guns would be just fine do you. No evidence of that, and your “live by the sword, die by the sword” violence meme is in direct contradiction to how your savior lived and professed that others should aspire to live. Non-violent interactions and spiritual righteous movements with martyrdom and sacrifice were espoused. You of course will interpret this in order to hold on to your precious weapons, completely contrary to that as to what your christian god postulated and stood for.
          Look below to answer your question about the sword analogy.

          • bob a

            Wow, you really are a self righteous know it all. You patting yourself on the back because you don’t espouse weapons as a means to protect against criminals raping, pillaging, and hurting innocent people. Sorry sir. You can stand idly by and watch that take place. Me? As a good christian, I will pull the trigger calmly and with confidence at that person’s head, and have no regret. And I do not believe you can, from scripture, prove to me that God would be disappointed with such an action. Stop with your pious, self righteous, pharisaical attitude.

      • UNCVIPER23

        God’s Holy Word says in the New Testament:

        Lu:22:36: Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

        Do you understand that?

        • Toxicosis

          So your Jesus was a violent Jesus?
          Did Jesus endorse and encourage violence in the Gospels, presumably a righteous kind of violence? Did he call his original disciples to this? Did he order all of his disciples to buy swords, really? One verse may indicate that he did.

          And Luke 22:36 reads:

          36 [Jesus] said to [the disciples], “But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag; and the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one.” (New Revised Standard Version, NRSV)

          Cited in isolation, the verse suggests that swords and violence are a possibility. It seems as if all of the disciples should go out and buy one each. After the death and burial of Jesus, they would have to face the world alone without him, so they thought.

          However, what happens to the apparent meaning of the verse when it is not read in isolation, but in context? Did Jesus really wield a sword and want all of the disciples to buy one each?

          Exegesis of Luke 22:36

          The historical context of Luke 22:36 demonstrates that for three years Jesus avoided making a public, triumphal entry of his visits to Jerusalem because he understood that when he set foot in the holy city in this way, he would fulfill his mission to die, in a death that looked like one of a common criminal, just as Isaiah the prophet had predicted hundreds of years before (Is. 53:12). He needed to complete his work outside of Jerusalem.

          Now, however, Jesus finally enters the city famous for killing her prophets (Luke 13:33-34), a few days before his arrest, trial and crucifixion, all of which he predicted. Religious leaders were spying on him and asked him trick questions, so they could incriminate him (Luke 20:20). These insincere questions, though they were also asked before he entered the city, increased in frequency during these compacted tense days. But he answered impressively, avoiding their traps. Despite the tension, each day Jesus taught in the temple, and crowds gathered around him, so the authorities could not arrest him, for fear of the people. Then Judas volunteered to betray him, saying that he would report back to the authorities when no crowd was present (Luke 22:1-6).

          As Passover drew near, Jesus asked some of his disciples to prepare the Last Supper (most likely the Seder). He elevated the bread and the wine, representing his body and blood, which was broken and shed for the sins of the world in the New Covenant (Luke 22:17-20). However, during the meal, Judas slipped out to search for the authorities because he knew that it was the custom of Jesus to go to the Mount of Olives to pray (Luke 21:37), and that night would be no different.

          At this point we pick up the textual context of Luke 22:36 (bold print). He is eating the Last Supper on the night he was betrayed.

          Luke 22:35-38 says:

          35 [Jesus] asked them [the eleven apostles], “When I sent you out without a purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”
          They said, “No, not a thing.”
          36 He said to them, “But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.”
          38 They [the disciples] said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
          “It is enough,” he replied. (NRSV)

          The textual context reveals at least two truths. First, Jesus contrasts his ministry before his arrival in Jerusalem with the tense few days in Jerusalem when spies and the authorities themselves were seeking to trap him. Does the tension play a part in understanding why he told his disciples to go out and buy swords? This is answered, below. Second, he says that he would be arrested and tried as a criminal, as the prophecy in Is. 53:12 predicted. Does this have anything to do with swords? Do criminals carry them around? This too is explained, below. Jesus may have a deeper meaning in mind than the violent use of the swords. What is it?

          The interpretation of the verses can follow either a strictly physical direction in which swords must be used, or a nonphysical one in which swords must not be used, during Jesus’ last hours. The surest and clearest direction is the nonliteral one, but first we analyze why the literal one will not fit into Luke 22:34-38 and into the passage about the arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane (Luke 22:39-53).

          Violent use of the swords

          Jesus says to the disciples to buy swords, but when they show him two, Jesus says the two are enough.

          • UNCVIPER23

            Old Testament for those thick or hard of hearing it says it TWICE:

            Proverb:14:12: There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

            Proverb:16:25: There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

            Look in the mirror.

          • UNCVIPER23

            OH P.S. I looked at what I typed and didn’t see anywhere I said that “Jesus said”. I said it was out of the New Testament.

            Bless you fella. No one in here is going to say anything the right way for you.

            • Toxicosis

              Well it surely wasn’t taken out of context now was it. Obviously if you’re a man who knows his bible, and well, it couldn’t have escaped who you might be quoting. Now could it.

              • UNCVIPER23

                I haven’t “taken” anything out of anything but made reference to THE text.

                I am also a nurse and the choice of your name says it all. “a condition of” the osis part. “septic”, “toxic” or “poisoned” the first part of your chosen. I rest my case. Go figure.

                Go to bed already.

              • hoser

                Toxic, Shut the Fuck Up you Liberal piece of shit. You have my permission to turn in your firearms you hamster. Perhaps you’ll get some food stamps in return. Me, I’ll keep mine and kill the first 30 dumb fucks who come thru my door to take ‘em. Savy!

          • bob a

            Sorry Toxic, you’re confusing words. I never said he condoned violence. I am saying he condoned protection against criminals causing harm to any person or persons. Based on how I read scripture, I don’t think he will condemn anyone for using force (killing) as a means of protection, so in that sense, I believe we are given the ‘God given’ right to bear arms. You choose not to bear arms, kudos to you. Wish you the best. But don’t condemn us for our belief that to bear arms is our natural right to protect. Our GOD GIVEN RIGHT to protect. Good day and good night.

      • Mike

        The Bible points to the spiritual..The 2nd Amendment directly addresses the Nature of man. Man given the opportunity has always exploited the unarmed. A really good book to help you understand the Constitution is the 5000 year leap.

        “Creator” can mean many things such as “God Given” or simply by the virtue of you being born human, “Humanity” or if your a Witch..”Nature Given”…Not to hard to understand.

  • steelerdude

    Like I said in the hyper report…if there were a few states that would say they were
    going to support the 2nd amendment and allow guns (utah, texas, new mexico, arizona)
    then the fed wouldnt know what to do…just like marijuana was legalized in certain
    states …the fed has no clue what to do with those states now…

    Had to see for myself here in so cal, visited turners sporting goods….yup, the ammo
    shelves were bare and there was 20 people at the counter buying guns…

    hope feinstein knows what she is getting the US into here….I dont think she has
    a fricken clue…

    anyone know what is driving that insane woman anyway?

    • steelerdude

      adding: what if those states invited the gun makers (smith and wesson, ruger) to come
      and build guns in their states…wouldnt that be a win win for those states! They
      can get the business taxes from them and offer a place to continue to get the guns!
      I hope the states think about this…

  • bob a

    Amen to all posts! I just posted this and many articles on gun control on my FB which has about 1000 ‘friends.’ Boy, did I open a can of worms and hit the hornets nest. I’m sure I’ll get deactivated. Oh well. This Frankenstien chic is nuts.

  • hoser

    Our government has lost it. They no longer have the Moral High Ground. They’ve not only bankrupted the present, but also our future generations. Financial collapse is right around the corner and they know it. Without Debt, they lose their control over the masses. That’s why they want our guns.

  • UNCVIPER23

    I don’t know if to take my time to educate the mindless, gutless, wussies or pity them.

    • Truthseeker

      Please don’t feed the TROLLS! He’s paid to steer the conversation in another direction, and to incite otherwise good people to make a threat which can be pursued for prosecution. Again, please don’t feed the TROLLS.

  • Troy

    If the government wants war with its own people, thats what it will get. Obama will be deported to his home place in Kenya.

  • Fedup

    Here’s a novel idea: If everyone is so upset about the feds violating our 2nd Amendment & state rights, why can’t we picket industries like firearms/ammunition (private corporations in our states) to stop dealing/supplying the feds as an act of protest?

  • GoodOleBoy

    As for Jesus, he is the one who became angry and drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip isn’t he? I contend our entire political class is full of money changers. I have a very unique view on the Bible and religion in that I believe it has been manipulated in translation and content to control the public. The words of Jesus still ring true for me though.

    People have the right to believe and say what they want about gun control but you do not have the right to force their beliefs and opinions on me. Whatever liberals think that some new laws and all the guns go away. This is false. Criminals by their very nature don’t obey laws. The other thing is firearms are a way of life and a tradition for many in this country. I got my first gun when I was 6. I know these people and they won’t hand over their firearms because a man in a suit says so.

    If and when tyranny and/or economic collapse comes to this country, all the anti gun, big city liberals will run to the hills seeking protection from us gun nut, supposedly ignorant hillbillies.

  • Mike

    Who cares about all this religious stuff? Has nothing at all to do with gun control. Has to do with all known historical behavior of man. No man in the History of all real men can be trusted to lead the unarmed. Every instance in history where the peeps were unarmed they have been slaughtered. Were the founders aware of the nature of man and did they understand history? Yes they did, and enshrined that belief in STONE as the 2nd amendment. To give the Peeps teeth to protect all their other rights. Im not a bible thumper and I am sick of hearing about the bible. I am an American by right of Birth as a human and guaranteed by my HUMANITY to protect myself and property from ANYTHING that threatens it…Including whacky Bible thumpers!

  • CAJUN

    It is all right there! libertyblitzkrieg.com 29DEC2012 Article from Ron Paul.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  


eight − 2 =

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>