Seattle is adopting a gun buyback program. Just this past month (today it’s January 14th, 2013) it seems that many cities and municipalities are getting on this particular bandwagon. The bandwagon was hastily rolled in to take advantage of people’s kneejerk reactions to the recent incident in Newtown, CT. The mainscream media is relentless in its assignment to wave dead children at the public—and a full array of negative emotions comes to the fore, emotions that trample down rational thought. Fear of guns (ridiculous on its face as a gun is a mute tool, only coming to life in the hands of the user), misplaced guilt (another absurdity), sense of duty (among the most devoted of sheeple), to name a few. The Department of Homeland Security is encouraging the phenomenon; no doubt it will make their planned future confiscation of all guns easier. The malicious propaganda out there right now is that all guns are evil—and via “guilt by association” all gun owners are too. This is a dangerous path for everyone. Responsible patriots and criminals are thrown into the same basket—get this idea out to the masses and repeat it long enough, and it becomes an accepted belief (just like many lies produced by governments historically worldwide). From the Homeland Security News Wire we read:
In the aftermath of the Connecticut mass shooting, private donors have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to cities around the United States to fund gun buy-back programs; thousands of guns – and two rocket launchers – have been collected, but the impact on a gun-saturated society is likely to be small: this year alone the FBI has recorded 16.8 million instant background checks of gun buyers, 400,000 more than last year, which was a record year.
Those who want to “do away with” all guns really love to talk about the “two rocket launchers” brought to a Los Angeles buy-back—but somehow forget to mention that these are just tubes used in training that had no threat to them whatsoever.
And here is a term sure to inspire fear: gun-saturated society. The DHS would have everyone believe that all of us are carrying, that guns are hiding behind the raisin bran in the grocery stores, that our umbrellas are simply not strong enough because, dontcha know, it’s raining guns out there! What should be of concern is the statement that the FBI has recorded 16.8 million background checks. Too many of us are good little citizens. Gun shows are better places to purchase guns than gun stores, but the government is trying to ban those, too. It would be a good idea at this point to just deal with individuals—but people have been conditioned to fear their neighbors, and especially people selling guns out of the trunk of their cars (usually, the TV warns us, at night in dark smelly alleys). So we are all going to find our own ways of procuring guns, but I recommend ways that don’t allow the government to know about it—or you.
It is truly ironic that the very act of government gun-grabbing is hailed as being socially responsible—but gun-grabbing by anyone else is thought of as criminal. In the DHS article, the mayor of Bridgeport, CT is fairly bubbling with glee:
All kinds of weapons, from rifles to shotguns and even assault weapons, have been brought in, and according to Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch, the program is already being considered a success.
“These guns could have created victims,” Finch said. “We know if we can reduce the number of weapons that are available through breaking into people’s houses and grabbing guns, we are a safer society.”
Guns cannot “create victims.” They are tools, just like screwdrivers and scissors (which, by the way, have been used by people who’ve committed murder). There are no victims without perpetrators—and perpetrators are human beings. Guns are inert; they do not just pick themselves up and walk over to someone and pull their own triggers. They cannot load their own bullets—that takes a human hand. And what about that statement about reducing the number of weapons available “through breaking into people’s houses and grabbing guns?” I take it as a sort of slip on the part of Mr. Finch. “We” can reduce the number of weapons….through (by means of) breaking into homes and grabbing people’s guns? A warning perhaps? After all, that is the government’s ultimate intent—grabbing all the guns. Breaking into people’s houses in order to get those guns may be a future exercise by the police/military.
What do people get for their guns? Far less than they are worth, unless they are in broken pieces or have been allowed to rust or corrode. In Seattle, you get a $100 gift card to use at amazon.com. In Bridgeport, the trade netted from $75 to $400—higher prices for assault rifles. San Francisco saw their police officers issuing IOUs—hopefully those were honored. A church in Dallas is offering a buy-back on the 19th of this month, paying up to $200 depending on the type of gun (want to guess what snags the most moolah?) For those folks needing food and/or money—and most do these days—getting cash for an unusable gun is an attractive idea. Unfortunately, desperate and poor folks, impoverished by a greedy corporatocracy, are now in a position of selling their safety for bread. But that’s the goal: take away means of self-defense so that there is none when genocide rides into town.
I won’t go for the tiny carrot the government is dangling in front of me. No amount of cash makes up for my security and freedom. And I refuse to buy into the “evil gun” propaganda that seems to be everywhere—the UK has strict gun control, yet has more violent crime per capita than we do in the US. Ben Swann succinctly answers Piers Morgan’s erroneous statements about how the UK is better here:.
In my opinion, gun shows are the way to go if someone wants to buy a gun—at the moment. Remember, there are plans in the works to eradicate them. Where does that leave us? On our own. But in my experience, it’s infinitely better that way.