Gun Control and Disarmament in America

[Mech]

Gun Control In America
A planned Agenda of The Committee of 300


The screenplay to outlaw the possession of firearms in the United States was written and put into motion long before any shots rang out at Columbine High School in Colorado. The Columbine shootings, along with the school shootings in Oregon in 1998, are just part of Act I; the latest installment in a PLANNED series of shooting massacre/atrocities in America that are designed to rile up the American public to a fevered pitch of hysteria and consequently create a mass DEMAND for the banning of all firearms in this country. Act II will include far more horrendous atrocities and acts of brutality by 'crazed' lone gunmen mowing down scores of innocents in schools buildings, or churches, or playgrounds, or community picnics, or fast food establishments or wherever young people might gather in the ordinary activities of American life. The more innocent and 'protected' the environment where these atocities WILL take place, the "better"- at least from the planners point of view. The goal is to sufficiently SHOCK the American public into accepting the 'necessity' of total gun control. As the months roll on and these shooting atrocities spread across the news, Clinton (1, 2, 3, 4) and Reno will be holding press conferences and calling for 'sane and reasonable controls' in order to put an "End to the Slaughter of Our Children". To help pull the net tighter, other government agencies will get in the act, including the IRS who will push to tax and register all firearms.

Act III will cluminate with the passage of federal law which will outlaw the possission of all firearms.

A complete ban on ALL firearms in the United States??

Yes. And it's going to HAPPEN unless a large enough segment of the American public QUICKLY wake up to the deceit and treachery being perpetrated and take VIGOROUS action to abort it.

What's So Bad About Gun Control?
The connection between gun control laws and the wholesale genocide of the affected populace was well illustrated in a November '99 article by Uri Dowbenko. The parallel in wording between Nazi Germany's 1938 Weapons Law and the the 1968 US Gun Control Act is unnerving.

The big push to outlaw guns in America is part of a larger agenda to dismantle and destroy the United States of America from within. One part of that plan is population control which the executive committee of the New World Order, The Committee of 300, wants firmly in place.

Other control mechanisms that are in the pipeline include the replacement of cash with plastic smartcards and foolproof ID/personal history files utilizing implantable microchips, retina scans, and DNA mapping. The smartcards and ID technologies are already being rapidly introduced in New Zealand, Australia, and Canada..

These and other "emergency measures" will be quickly instituted to meet the demands of a manufactured and orchestrated 'crisis' or series of disastrous events (Y2K, domestic biological attack, big earthquakes, stock market crash, war, food shortages, etc.) The London-based Committee of 300 requires that their crowd control measures be in place before they can proceed with their plans for the breakup and dissolution of the United States which they plan to incorporate with Canada and Mexico into a new 10 sector New States of America region.

Banning guns in England, Australia, and New Zealand was, relatively speaking, a peice of cake for the Committee of 300. The technique used in those countries is virtually the same that is now being applied in the United States. It's done with mind control technologies which have greatly advanced since the early years of Nazi and Japanese experiments during World War II. The CIA's MK Ultra mind control project was developed into fruition by former Nazis-such as Dr Josef Mengele of Auschwitz notority-imported into the United States under Operation Paper Clip. "MK", by the way, is the German abbreviation for mind control.

The details of how people are brought under Total Mind Control is discussed on another page, but relative to the issue of gun control, the scenario goes like this: A mind-controlled individual(s) is 'programmed' to slaughter a classroom, nursery school, or playground filled with young children. The media covers the story to the hilt. Of course, the killers almost always conveniently commit suicide, so no one ever gets to question to them. Public emotions are pumped up with lots of video and close up photos of shocked and greiving survivors, bloodstained halls, and sobbing friends at the gravesite of the victims. Soon, the media is grinding out the anti-gun propaganda. The "polls" all agree that 'enough is enough' and voila, before you can say "Hey, isn't this what Hitler did in the 1930's?" the controlled politicians and their anti-gun lobbyists 'friends' arrange to quickly ram through the (already pre-drafted) legislation and in a flash, Total Gun Control is a fait d'acompli. Seems to work every time.

It worked in the UK after a mind-controlled individual killed 16 small children and their teacher in Dunblane, Scotland on March 13, 1996. About 10 months later, parliamentary laws were passed that said that possessing a gun in the UK meant 10 years in prison. Legislation was passed even faster in Australia when a gunman armed with an assault rifle killed 35 and wounded 19 in a massacre in Tasmania, Australia on March 28, 1996-just two weeks after the Dunblane shootings. (Coincidence that these two massacres occured in quick succession of each other? Hardly.)

Gun control won't go down so easily or quickly in the United States, though. The United States has a much larger population than England or Australia and a 225 year tradition of NOT turning in their guns to the government. It's called The Second Amendment to The United States Constitution. The drafters of the US Constitution realized the potential for totalitarian abuse by the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branches of the Federal government and wanted to insure that the ULTIMATE POWER of the government would REMAIN in the hands of the PEOPLE and NOT the POLITICIANS of the United States government. The "people" of the United States means just that- the people or the citizens of the country. It doesn't mean the National Guard, or the Armed Forces, or the local police, or Fedearal police forces such as the FBI, BATF, DEA, etc. It means the PEOPLE, the common civilians and citizens of this country. Many deceitful politicians and anti-gun organizations wish the American public to think otherwise.

The RIGHT to Bear Arms was seen by the Founding Fathers as one of the NECESSARY SELF DEFENSE mechanisms REQUIRED by citizens of a free confederated REPUBLIC, which is what the framers of the US Constitution created. The Founding Fathers of America did not create a Democracy, as the media and liberal politicians would have us believe. They actually created a Republic; an important distinction.

It's going to take a lot more slaughtered children splashed across the evening news to overcome the reluctance of Americans to give up their constututional right to bear arms ...And more slaughtered children there will be... But just bear in mind who is REALLY responsible for those deaths: The Committee of 300 and the traitorous individuals in our government who are working on their behalf. .
The shooters at these massacres are merely PAWNS in a much larger game.

Become aware America. You are fast losing all of the Constitutional Rights and Guarantees that our forefathers shed their blood to gain.

[Mech]

From FLKook at CTC.....

Great Info on the plan to disarm civilians.

www.mega.nu/ampp/disarm1.html#metatop

The Citizen Disarmament Agenda - Part 1


``Knighthood flourished before the time of guns and gunpowder when battles still were won by hand-to-hand conflicts of heavy-armored knights. Even in peacetime knights looked for conflicts in which to engage. Fighting was almost an everyday occurrence, and the common people generally could not protect themselves against an invading foe. In times of danger they fled to the castles or strongholds owned by the nobles. To obtain protection the poorer folk became the serfs or villeins of their powerful neighbors, and those in turn were the vassals of those still more powerful. The institution of knighthood was part of this feudal system.''
-Encyclopedia Britannica, entry on knighthood, fromhttp://search.ebi.eb.com/ebi/printArticle/0,8447,35027,00.html

``In the Middle Ages, alchemists in Europe [...] learned (probably from the Chinese) how to mix sulfur, charcoal and saltpeter to make gunpowder, the chemical product that more than any other single thing led to the end of the feudal system and the birth of the modern world.''
-from the script of Chemists at Work, part 1: "A Brief History of Chemistry", by Hawkhill Live Action Videos, from www.hawkhill.com/602s.html

In a war, the primary objective of a combatant is to destroy the capacity of the enemy to wage war. The preferred method of achieving this objective is with minimal destruction of the enemy's assets, since assets that survive the war enrich the victor. Destruction can be avoided by pursuing a psychological strategy rather than a strategy of violent confrontation. In particular, a psychological strategy can be pursued which prompts the voluntary disarmament of the enemy.

Today, as throughout the history of historical civilization, the establishment is waging war on the rest of the world's population. Psychological strategy is foremost. The establishment seeks to disarm the enemy - those people who are not within or aligned with the establishment - by convincing the enemy that it is in its interests to disarm. Wherever this disarmament transpires, the enemy itself becomes an asset of the victor - of the establishment. That is to say, those defeated by the psychological warfare become slaves of the victors. The establishment largely disarms itself, of course, and indeed members of the establishment are slaves to other members of the establishment. At no point does the principle of freedom rouse them from their stupor.

The mass media is a conduit for an eternal avalanche of intense renditions of psychopathic violence, much of it involving firearms. From the perspective of the establishment, the purpose of this campaign is to assure that wherever large numbers of ordinary citizens are in possession of firearms, psychopathic firearm violence regularly rips through the community, thereby destroying the community and concomitantly destroying the political capital of its former members. This strategy is a plain and pathetic failure, and always will be, since contrary to the wishes of the establishment, human nature is far less fundamentably mutable than is necessary for television and movies to transform basically respectful people into raging psychopaths - even part-time ones. The pathological media do, however, foster in many a pathological fear of weapons, which is second in its usefulness to the establishment disarmament campaign only to actual mass carnage.

With the War on Drugs and judicial practices that routinely release known recidivist violent criminals, the establishment assures that - at least in large cities - there is a steady, daily stream of firearms violence, which is selectively covered by television news. The law enforcement apparatus is utterly pathological: this phenomenon of recidivism and incessant criminal violence is artificial, a deliberate strategy of the establishment.

*

As long as the establishment believes that the common citizenry is equipped with weaponry that is sufficiently effective to repel any imposition of force by the state, the establishment will not attempt to impose that force injudiciously (chiefly, toward the end of overt deconstitutionalization), and so the power structure is stable. Once the establishment believes the citizenry no longer possesses the means to forcibly repel the state, the establishment will proceed with deconstitutionalization imposed with force. Nonetheless, the citizenry will likely still be equipped and impelled to repel them, and the violence that follows will topple the status quo power structure catastrophically. If through uncharacteristic competence and efficiency the state were to successfully disarm the common citizenry, the state itself would factionalize, and the various armed factions of the state would engage each other in brutal wars of attrition, fighting for supremacy. In particular, the Department of Defense would engage the Departments of Justice and the Treasury in an immensely violent and destructive conflict. Thus, any consistently self-interested beneficiary of the status quo will adamantly safeguard the means of the common citizenry to repel grossly unconstitutional affronts by the state, and moreover will assure that the establishment fully appreciates this capability of the common citizenry, and is not able to remove it by exploiting registration databases and through other machinations. Members of the establishment are not consistent, and are not truly self-interested, and so the aforementioned conflagrations are inevitable.

A state monopoly on armament is the most dramatic and absolute form of state power at the expense of citizen power. As the citizenry loses power to the state, the citizenry's capacity and tendency to innovate and produce declines in similar measure. As innovation and production decline, the capacity of the nation to sustain itself economically and defend itself militarily decline in similar measure. Eventually, the nation succumbs to collapse from within, and exploitation and invasion from without. This is the fate of all empires and all totalitarian regimes.

[Mech]

Important introductory reading:

View my report on S.505. Print and mail it to your representative and senators!

Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews, by practicing (and prevailing repeatedly in SCOTUS) constitutional attorney Stephen P. Halbrook (PhD, JD), published in the Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, No. 3, 483-535 (2000)

Also, an excellent case study from 1990: Ten Years Later: An Analysis of the Effects of New York City's Mandatory Sentencing Law, by Talcott J. Franklin, sociologist at the University of Washington, and research director for the Second Amendment Foundation.

*

The second amendment of the US constitution, which has been a part of the document since its 1791-Dec-15 ratification (the initial body of the document became effective 1789-Mar-4, and the Bill of Rights was passed by the House and Senate on 1789-Aug-24 and 1789-Sep-9 respectively), reads:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

If this is restated in more precise modern language, it reads:

Safeguarding of a state that respects the rights of the nation's citizens depends on those citizens being individually equipped with military pattern weapons, and their being practiced and competent in their use in uncoordinated and coordinated warfare against those who violate those rights, whoever they may be. Consistent with but not dependent on this observation, no law can diminish the right of each citizen to fabricate, sell, purchase, own, carry, and practice with such weapons, particularly including firearms.

It is entirely reasonable to expect certain restrictions on who can own and carry firearms. Violent criminals are excluded consistent with the US Constitution because these people have deprived others involuntarily of constitutionally recognized rights, thereby forfeiting the rights they would otherwise enjoy under that constitution (they have breached the contract).

Restriction on where, how, and which firearms can be possessed and carried (excluding ``assault rifles'', ``Saturday night specials'', ``school zones'', or concealed carry, for example) are not consistent with the constitution.

To be specific, current gun control measures in place (all of the following are unconstitutional, which is to say, illegal) are:

The National Firearms Act of 1934 provides for discretionary local government licensing, central federal government registration, and onerous excise taxation ($200 per item) of transfers of a variety of basic firearms items:

report suppressors (which protect hearing and reduce noise pollution around firing ranges, though do not come remotely close to completely eliminating the noise of the gun)
automatic weapons (protected by the Second Amendment prima facie)
large bore rifles (greater than .5" bore, the type used in the Revolutionary War, also protected by the Second Amendment prima facie)
shotguns with barrels shorter than 18 inches
various other standard military weapons protected by the Second Amendment
The Act also absolutely prohibits importation of any of these items for transfer to citizens.

The constitutionality of NFA1934 was upheld in a ridiculous ruling in U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), by FDR's liberal-packed court (James Jeffries (on whom more below) calls it ``an opinion so opaque that inferior courts, practitioners and scholastics are still arguing about the holding of the case''). The defendant was not represented in the proceeding, there was no certiorari, and the appeal was directly from a district court to the Supreme Court, each of which is uncannily bizarre. In its decision, the court implied that Amendment 2 applied only to the militia, found that the general citizenry (or at least, able men 18 to 40) is the militia, and recognized that the militia was expected to be able to appear ``bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time'' (in armies), then supplied a flotilla of quotations of centuries-old state documents describing arms in common use centuries ago, then concluded absolutely bizarrely that since the type of weapon at issue in the case (a sawed-off shotgun) did not appear in these museum inventories, it was lawful for the corporate United States to put someone in prison for a decade or more for possessing or transporting it without the permission of the corporate United States. This is obvious reversible error, but there is no body but the selfsame Court to reverse it, and so the decision sits there attracting flies.

The decision is wholly without merit and unconstitutional on its face. Short barrel shotguns are in regular use in components of the US military. The standard rifle for the US military is the AR15, designated the M16. Millions of these rifles have been issued to troops in the US, and to those of its allies. This rifle is banned by NFA1934, by GOPA1986 (more below), by the 1993 assault weapon ban (more below), and by VCCLEA1994 (more below). All of these bans are in absolute, facial, violent, and astonishingly direct opposition to the Constitution of the United States in its most plain, obvious, and presently relevant meaning. As a consequence, the corporate United States has, since 1934, been an obvious lawless and criminal regime on this basis alone.