The great conspiracy?

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by crackshot, Nov 23, 2011.

  1. crackshot

    crackshot New Member

    65
    0
    0
    Has anyone noticed the increase in Government conspiracy theories that abound lately? And not from crazy wing nut theorists. Increased warnings from the NRA concerning the government hatching a plan to confiscate your guns? Building distrust In the current administration with the Fast and Furious scandal when the problem actually started way back in 2003 in the Bush administration. Millions had been funneled into Mexico through the Dept. of Defense before Obama was even gleam in the Democratic eye, yet it's big news that money is being given to the corrupt Mexican officials just recently. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now, yet we are expected to act outraged at the Democratic party and the anti-gun shenanigans. When the admittedly NRA friendly Repubs were doing the naughtiness, where were the defenders of liberty and freedom?

    Oh, that's right. There was no wrongdoing during the Republican administration. I'm a conservative Democrat, by the way. But I've considered No Party Preference.

    If all of this is true, what then? Will any of you give up your guns when the secret UN treaty is enforced? The government has been keeping pretty good records when it comes to Americans buying firearms. Are you willing to rollover and play the good and loyal American?

    What's scarier still is that the NRA is using these issues, true or not, to further it's own agenda. Don't get the wrong idea. I'm an NRA member too. But since I have joined I've received several LAST NOTICE flyers to renew my membership. There's been a HUGE push to get me to buy Life insurance, car insurance, even the NRA wine club, if you can believe that! I have a feeling that this is all building up to something.

    I for one am tired of the manipulation by all sides. I don't need the government deciding for me how I should do this or that. I don't want the NRA telling me who I should vote for through intimidation and fear. And I certainly don't think the NRA Wine club is appropriate. Wine? Come on!
     
  2. willfully armed

    willfully armed New Member

    2,096
    1
    0
    The NRA is a capitalistic organization. PERIOD.
     

  3. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    Maybe you should review some history and read the federalist papers. A good American doesn't roll over and surrender to tyranny. That's why we have 2a.
     
  4. crackshot

    crackshot New Member

    65
    0
    0
    Capitalists yes. Wine! Of all things! Guns and booze don't mix.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2011
  5. stickhauler

    stickhauler New Member

    57
    0
    0
    There are several differences between the "gun walking" programs that went on during the Bush years and "Fast & Furious." The main one is, in the Bush era, our government was working with Mexican officials to interdict the firearms, in "F&F", no such cooperation between US Law Enforcement and Mexico's. And the sheer number of firearms walked by this administration, in less than 2 years time, is double or more the number in both Bush era programs. Hell, the ones still unaccounted for from "F&F" is more than the combined number of both Bush programs.

    Oh, and one other little difference, the Bush programs didn't provide weapons used in the murders of 2 Federal LEO's.
     
  6. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    4
    0
  7. Sniper03

    Sniper03 Supporting Member Supporter

    7,763
    312
    83
    As I stated in another post. Come to get my guns and see what you get!
    That is not a threat it is a promise. "SO COME GET EM! Bring your body bags with you so you can leave in them! I am a true American and I will defend America and our rights as I have done with most of you in the past! ;) If they are monitoring our posts they can take this to the bank! As the Japanese stated when they decided not to attack the American homeland. There will be a gun behind every tree!

    03
     
  8. AcidFlashGordon

    AcidFlashGordon New Member

    1,657
    0
    0
    You are correct....up to a point. There are parts of these United States where the population is armed (some armed to the teeth) and will stand up against any federal attempts to confiscate their guns. Those parts are, most likely, the more rural areas where the people use their guns for hunting AND are constantly honing their shooting skills. The places where any confiscation plans will most likely succeed are the urban areas...cities where there are "casual" gun owners who occasionally head out to the range to run a few rounds through their guns.

    Don't get me wrong, there are both types of people in both areas so there will be some who submit to federal confiscation (circa Red Dawn - the original - but to a much lesser degree). If anything would ignite armed revolt, a federal attempt at full gun confiscation could be the "trigger" for such an event.

    As the bottom line of my signature states, bring yours if you come for mine!
     
  9. crackshot

    crackshot New Member

    65
    0
    0
    That's also incorrect. The number of firearms reported to the US government was vastly understated during Bush's program; a lot of soldiers in the Mexican army defected to the Cartels with their rifles and a lot of other ordnance when the criminal groups exerted their influence with either money or violence. Poverty is a driving force. It was proven the first program didn't work; why it was restarted is anyone's guess (trying to prove our gun laws were too lax). Hopefully, the investigation will continue

    Either way, the guns fell into the wrong hands. Watch this interview by the NRA regarding this issue.

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0R1Hjy-hMd8&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/ame]
     
  10. thdrduck

    thdrduck Member

    490
    1
    16
    Everyone needs to remember who is doling out this information. For the most part the statement "you will only know what they want you to know" has merit. Penn state has received way more press then F&F. :mad:
     
  11. opaww

    opaww New Member

    4,868
    0
    0
    You might want to add to this, that the Bush one also planted tracking devices in the weapons so they could be tracked. Where the F&F today did nothing of the kind. When the Bush administration found that the Mexican drug people were not as stupid as they thought they were they stopped the gun walking.
     
  12. lonewolf101

    lonewolf101 New Member

    528
    0
    0
    The Gov't is just to big today! and it's NOT WORKING FOR THE COMMON MAN! today.
     
  13. hiwall

    hiwall Well-Known Member

    4,292
    75
    48
    I agree with most of what has been stated so far. We are all gun people here but still have different opinions(which is a good thing). On the NRA I disagree on many things they say and do. But they are still and have always been our loudest voice. There is no way we would have the gun freedoms we do today if there was no NRA. Everyone one this forum should be a member. It is easy to find fault with the NRA as some things they do are (in my eyes stupid) but my statement stands"There is no way we would have the gun freedoms we do today if there was no NRA. Everyone one this forum should be a member."
     
  14. Chainfire

    Chainfire Well-Known Member Supporter

    5,536
    976
    113
    Who has sources for the "secret" UN treaty language. I would think you would have to be a James Bond to even know it existed. If it smells like BS, it is probably BS.

    Folks, remember this is an election year.

    This is also a fund-raising year for the NRA. (as is every year) The NRA is the most paraniod (or dishonest) organization I know of. Every month is a new and horrible disaster coming up that they can fix. Then the next week I get a begging letter; the sky is falling, send money.If you believed the NRA articles from 2007, by now none of us could own a firearm because Obama was elected. They get dues from me every year, as I support their training programs, which are second to none. They don't get an extra dime for their partisan politics.

    In the past three years I have only seen positive moves from states and the federal government concerning firearm use and ownership. Obama has not sneaked into my gun safe and taken a damn thing. Neither did Obama prevent me from getting an FFL-03 or buying a heap of firearms and ammo, through the mail.

    The president is surely, personally, against firearm rights as we know and love them, but he has limited power to enforce his personal will on the public. Hillary never knew a gun she liked but the same principal applies to her ability to deal with it. One of the great things about the American form of government is the separation of powers. No one person or group can enforce their will on the public at large. No one is going to "sneak" a treaty past the congress, to think it can happen is to not understand how our government works.
     
  15. crackshot

    crackshot New Member

    65
    0
    0
    Two words for you:

    Executive Order

    I know about propaganda, you can see it on a small scale even in local elections. Now imagine the machinations that go into national elections. I agree with the NRA on some things; when it comes to safety and classes, youth training, you are absolutely right, they are second to none. I don't necessarily agree with their politics either. I'm a very conservative democrat, I believe there are people out there that genuinely need help.

    I'm not too impressed with the Republican candidate line up. While I was initially leaning republican, there truly aren't any outstanding candidates. Flip-floppers and speaking out of one side of their mouthers. Not traits I want in a leader.

    I know we are all impassioned about different things. We all have varying opinions on a wide range of topics. One thing I know for sure: We all love our guns.
     
  16. dog2000tj

    dog2000tj New Member

    8,176
    2
    0
    What are these conspiracies you speak of? :cool:
     

    Attached Files:

  17. partdeux

    partdeux Well-Known Member

    4,686
    272
    83
    Then you get stories like this
     
  18. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    Wonder how the healthcare scam sneaked past congress. They didn't even read the damn thing. What makes you think these jackasses will read a treaty that comes their way?
     
  19. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    It doesn't matter if the Senate ratifies a treaty that steps on the constitution. Signing a treaty is NOT one of the two ways to change the constitution.

    This has happened before and courts have struck the treaties down. I'm not too worried.
     
  20. stickhauler

    stickhauler New Member

    57
    0
    0
    I understand the reality that firearms from the US were provided to drug cartels through the legal purchases by the Mexican military. And as the drug cartels have infiltrated the Mexican military, they simply tell whoever they have "turned" to their side what they want. It's ordered through the regular supply system, then handed over to the cartels when they arrive.

    That does not negate the argument that the gun walking during the Bush years was significantly different than "Fast & Furious." In the case of "F&F", the plan was that they'd allow straw purchases and movement of arms to the cartels to "get" the top guys of the cartels. How it works that the Justice Department has any arrest powers in Mexico has yet to be explained.

    In Operation Wide Receiver and Linebacker, the purchases were allowed with tracking devices imbedded into the guns. They were done with the knowledge of Mexican law enforcement, for the guns to be interdicted when moved across the border. Guns sold to Mexico through legal avenues are NOT the same as those smuggled into Mexico. Guns transferred to cartels by Mexican government officials are NOT smuggled, nor are firearms and other kinds of armament stolen by Mexican soldiers when they go AWOL.