0
0
Everyone who reads my blogs knows that I’m an Independent. I’ve sided with Democrats in the last elections, but I’ve also agreed with some Republican policies. This is because I support views that make common sense make sense. In that respect, I believe that if a so-called New World Order is going to be possible, the American, Arab, South American, East European and African militias must be disarmed. But how can this be done? When it comes to gun laws in America, I don’t believe in shrinking a law-abiding citizen’s right to bear arms. I happen to think that guns do not kill people, but instead, it is people who kill people. Therefore, people being killers, will use a variety of weapons to do just that.
This is my belief. I also believe all American citizens should be able to protect their life, their family, and their property. I think if you call someone to defend you, pretty soon you are going to need something to protect you from that someone. If someone has not committed a crime, they are mentally healthy and have never been incarcerated for violence, there should be no reason why they should not be allowed to have whatever gun or guns they want. Yes, there should be an extensive background check on the family or person seeking to own a gun. There should be a system to ensure that “military grade weapons” are not kept in homes of families or persons that house mentally ill relatives. This is also assuming that a criminal could be armed regardless of the existence of background checks or gun laws.
Most people do not see a need to own a gun as they have been bred to never rise up. No matter how awkward the situation or what new system overpowers them, they stay put because this is what (in so many ways) they were taught. To them, it is the right thing to do. They appreciate the order of things however it is and rely on the system for their protection. They hope for a financial breakthrough seeing that as their only real redemption. I’m not a frequent traveler, but usually, when I do travel, I end up living there. This is how I got to understand each country’s set of laws and how their citizens cope with the system in their country. Most people are gun free.
As a traveler, I must figure this out (among other things) and adjust my behavior in each state to abide by their laws. In each country, I saw that gun ownership and sex laws were most emphasized. Some countries had already used psychologists in conjunction with an active media system within a long-standing Monarchical mind frame, and their citizens had already been bred to accept their national creed as a fact of life. This means before a generation was born their ancestors were already educated in what is to be believed. Then this belief was passed down through schooling, the media, music, and word of mouth. I found this to be true in every country I’ve been to… including the United States which does not have a visual Monarch. However, I’ve heard a lot about Uncle Sam.
In the United States, all humans are equal under God. America scorns the idea of a Monarch just because we do not believe that one person, family or entity should be given exclusive authority or privilege over the rest of the general population only because of their bloodline. In America authority is appointed for a period of time. Everyone keeps what they earn having the right to protect their earnings or investment at all cost. And if the said earnings or expenditures make the person wealthy and influential, then they are as wealthy and influential as their wealth allows them to become. This does not mean that we do not respect other countries that have Kings, Queens, Princes, and Princesses. We appreciate those systems as long as they are not brought to the United States. Every American man sees himself is a king, his woman as his queen, his children as princes and princesses and his property as his kingdom. The protection of his life, family, and property is not in anyone’s power as it lies in his own hands and that of the members of his family. However, we pay enough tax to employ the service of policemen, firemen, and paramedics who can assist when called for help.
The Second Amendment proclaims that: “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 you look at this law, you should see the word “Militia” and how it is not a mistake that this word was used. A “Militia” is defined as “A military force of civilians to supplement a regular army in an emergency.” Whether it’s the FBI, US Marshals, CIA, DEA, State Trooper or Sheriff’s department, the constitution clearly states that no matter how cherished, any authority can be forcefully removed from jurisdiction by militia if it is deemed “being necessary to the security of a free State.” Nothing against law enforcement, they are protected under the second amendment, and they do have the right to be a militia. The decision of whether to remove or let remain an entity in authority is made by the citizen and not the government. Therefore all power is limited to the will of the people. More so, if a body which was placed in office, to provide a specific service, should take the law into their own hands, citizens reserve the right to remove them from power either peacefully or by force.
NOTE 1: Sex = the continuation of a clan, a bloodline or a family. When a man gets drunk in a nightclub and seeks to mate with a broad-hipped female, he is instinctively attempting to reproduce his genes. This is what sex is. A woman who mates with a sizeable shouldered stud is also naturally seeking to breed an offspring with the same qualities she has admired in the stud.
Knowing this fundamental principle behind sex and how that power can be misused or used, every political system made it a priority to have their own set of sex laws. Some base these laws on religious abstinence while some support the requirements on a constitutional regulation. Once the system is taught to one generation, they pass it down to the rest.
NOTE 2: Gun ownership = power to kill. Before guns people had swords and many of them were psycho human butchers. Guns were created with one purpose in mind, this is to shoot with as relative ease as possible. In our society you have your standard rifle free law abiding citizen, you have your standard gun-owning law-abiding citizen, you have your criminal citizen, and you have your law enforcement, citizen. Each of these fall in a group of people who play different functions in society. Some are legal, and others are illegal.
Nobody’s life or existence is more precious than the other; each person does not have the right to kill anyone. The law enforcement does not have the right to kill; citizens do not have the right to kill. No one does. Only soldiers have the right to die, and that’s during a war. But with the existence of money, power and the need to produce an offspring, the gun became the most common weapon used to determine who gets what and when. This is why laws are made to keep order in society, the police protect and serve the system while the rich and powerful secure the reproduction of their bloodline. Therefore if everyone was stripped of their right to bear arms, in some way, their ability to rule and the potential of an uprising is detoured. Everyone will be a subject in a policed state. This is not the United States. The United States government has gotten itself involved with foreign governments that seek a one world government. However, to sell this to Americans, they must first disarm the militia. And this is in violation of the Second Amendment.
What this means is, although it is nice to have 911 emergency service, an American feels he or she should have the freedom to opt in or opt out of that service. You can’t force someone to be helped if they don’t want to be maintained. In order words, people may need a backup as per the strength of their tax dollars, but they do not need the police to have complete authority over what happens in their situation. Again, this is with no disrespect to the service provided. Americans believe all including the police is equal to God, and unless you are God Himself you may guarantee freedom and liberty, but you cannot ensure anyone’s total safety. Therefore, if one does not desire a service based on their competence to control the situation, no one should force their will upon them.
Today’s courts have wiggled their way closer to infringing this American right. Law Enforcement has armed themselves to the teeth and shown they will hold nothing back (even killing a civilian) to protect the system. While people thought the law was there to protect them, they have realized that the law protects itself, seeing them as its subject. In the Second Amendment, the bill was intended to be subject to the people’s will. How was government able to etch close to infringing on the Second Amendment with immunity? It was done slowly over several years using every media and word of mouth outlet to get the majority of that generation to actually believe what they are told. The usual bait and switch technique.
When it comes to gun ownership, most other countries were already taught to believe that their only protection comes from the police. Though this is a beautiful service to have, it renders useless the need to protect yourself. It leads one to become dependent. The fact that these types of services were not propagated is because whoever has a gun is in control. If you add a license to kill with that gun, then the gun carrier is basically untouchable. For this reason, alone I do not agree with any law or a new system that takes arms away from the people no matter what the reason is.
If the people must be disarmed, then all law enforcement must be disabled as well. There should be another way to solve the problem of gun violence without taking away the rights of the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms merely prevents the government from becoming too powerful. As it stands now, citizens are not equally armed as the government. I don’t believe in hunting unless it is to feed yourself and your family. I think it’s a waste of life to kill an animal if you were not going to eat it. This goes for birds and fishes too. I don’t feed wild animals, so I have no need to shoot at them. *
My heart goes out to every victim of gun violence in the world.
What’s with Americans and guns? You guys are very sensitive about them. I know you are a Canadian but did you live in the US or something?
Gun violence is a problem in America.