"DISARMED: A History of Gun Control - Operation Paul Revere"

[RED333 1,025]

Joe Carr is one of my State Reps, one of the good guys.

(This is posted from TN Gun Owners)

I am asking the MODS not to move this for 1 week, please.

I need some help, as I cant get the link to work.

Copy and past to watch the vid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Vu6fWro68

 

DISARMED: A History of Gun Control - Operation Paul Revere

 

Published on Apr 29, 2013

It's time to go beyond the media hype and emotional rhetoric. An Alex Jones http://www.InfoWars.com Paul Revere Production -- Because there's a war on for your mind!

Created by producer Michael Termale (http://www.MichaelShaneMedia.com/) and Anthony Gucciardi (http://www.Storyleak.com/).

THE FILM

DISARMED stands as a challenge to the mainstream media's manipulation and disinformation surrounding the 'gun control debate' -- an issue that is truly not about the control of guns, but people.

In a 31 blast of hard-hitting information, DISARMED is the ultimate information bomb for newcomers and veteran news followers alike. As detailed by news juggernaut Mike Adams of NaturalNews:

"Disarmed is totally hard hitting, it is a 31 minute red pill for those who still cling to the concept of gun free zones and mass disarmament" - Mike Adams of NaturalNews

DISARMED is 100% free online, and you are encouraged to send out this mind-seeking informational payload to friends, family, and strangers.

THE CREW

DISARMED contains 100% original content created within the very short time frame of the InfoWars Operation Paul Revere Contest (http://www.InfoWars.com/contest/), and was created using the backbone team of established producer Mike Termale and host/journalist Anthony Gucciardi.

During the short time period of just under a few months, the film was filmed and completed with the two individuals working around the clock to finish up production, taking over 24 hours of interviews alone and compressing the dozens of film hours into a hard-hitting, compact info bomb.

Edited May 5, 2013 by RED333

[Big John! 2,062]

Good video. Thanks for posting.

 

The only reason I can see for our governments to contiually insist on pushing this issue is that they have an agenda and armed citizens do not serve well for that agenda.

 

There is no other reason. I retard could look at any of the stats and see that gun crime, especially modern sporting rifle crime, is not even a drop in the bucket of lives lost in the US. The government is well aware of these stats and yet they pursue. What is their true end result of this pursuit?

Edited May 5, 2013 by Big John!

[Syndicate 812]

youtube video not working when I cut and paste it

[Lone Eagle 839]

[VIDEO]http://youtu.be/x1Vu6fWro68[/VIDEO]

 

There ya go, Red. Good video, and a lot of info crammed in a short time frame.

[RED333 1,025]

Thanks much Wolf, I dont know why I could not get to work.

[Remek 771]

Great video. One question though, and I think I have asked before, but I don't remember a response.

 

Do the various stats on firearm killings reflect both non-LEO and LEO homocides? If so, what numbers do we get without LEO ?

[Remek 771]

my searches have been unfruitful, but suggest that the numbers are near or higher than the total of homocides by firearms reported in the report.

 

I wonder if the numbers we are seeing actually reflect mostly LEOs shootings which killed the assailant/victim/whatever.

[jerry52 893]

We need to keep in perspective the survival rates for gun shot wounds is very high due to the the advance in medical care, other wise they would be higher.

It's nothing to see bangers down here who have been shot more than one time.

We live in a violent country that's a fact. Gun removal is not the solution it is the family not setting standards for their children.

[Remek 771]

Not to pick a fight, but we dont live in a violent country. Look to sera lione, south africa, uganda, or a host of other countries for what a violent country looks like. We live in a very safe country in reality.

[jrance@iacwds.com 716]

Great post, let's try to get this to go viral. Thank you Red333.

 

1911

[gunman1 1,753]

Good stuff Red, thanks for posting it.

[Big John! 2,062]

Not to pick a fight, but we dont live in a violent country. Look to sera lione, south africa, uganda, or a host of other countries for what a violent country looks like. We live in a very safe country in reality.

I couldn't agree more. I'm getting really tired of the gun debate. There is no debate. Shall not be infringed. Fuck... More people are killed with a hammer in one year than a rifle of any kind in several years.

 

This is all a takeover of some kind agenda and with the sheeple following the feel good bull shit, I don't see any way to stop it.

[bws1 58]

Not to pick a fight, but we dont live in a violent country. Look to sera lione, south africa, uganda, or a host of other countries for what a violent country looks like. We live in a very safe country in reality.

I couldn't agree more. I'm getting really tired of the gun debate. There is no debate. Shall not be infringed. Fuck... More people are killed with a hammer in one year than a rifle of any kind in several years.

 

This is all a takeover of some kind agenda and with the sheeple following the feel good bull shit, I don't see any way to stop it.

27 amendments and only one says "Shall not be infringed..." What's to interpret? It's pretty clear fucking cut to me.

[jerry52 893]

Not to pick a fight, but we dont live in a violent country. Look to sera lione, south africa, uganda, or a host of other countries for what a violent country looks like. We live in a very safe country in reality.

I couldn't agree more. I'm getting really tired of the gun debate. There is no debate. Shall not be infringed. Fuck... More people are killed with a hammer in one year than a rifle of any kind in several years.

 

This is all a takeover of some kind agenda and with the sheeple following the feel good bull shit, I don't see any way to stop it.

John I was not talking about guns but violence in general we have become a more violent country. This is why people need Guns for self protection.

[LuPiN8oR 333]

Very well made video. Now if only we could get the anti 2a crowd to watch it without averting their eyes n stickin their fingers in their ears n goin "lalalalala"!

[Big John! 2,062]

 

Not to pick a fight, but we dont live in a violent country. Look to sera lione, south africa, uganda, or a host of other countries for what a violent country looks like. We live in a very safe country in reality.

I couldn't agree more. I'm getting really tired of the gun debate. There is no debate. Shall not be infringed. Fuck... More people are killed with a hammer in one year than a rifle of any kind in several years.

 

This is all a takeover of some kind agenda and with the sheeple following the feel good bull shit, I don't see any way to stop it.

John I was not talking about guns but violence in general we have become a more violent country. This is why people need Guns for self protection.

 

But if we take away all the guns the violence will stop. Re-nig told me this so it has to be true.

[jerry52 893]

?????????

[uzitiger 193]

Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership also made movies about the dangers of gun control and the genocide that follows. Their movie Innocents Betrayed is similar and shows how people were first disarmed then murdered. They also show how the 1968 Gun Control Act is based on the Nazi Gun Control Act of 1938 and this is where the 'sporting' clause comes from. The sporting clause has been used by anti gun progressives when they try to implement restrictions on gun ownership. Most gun laws are Nazi based.

[Big John! 2,062]

I don't know whether or not this dude is actually a SH father. He forgot the most important one IMO. Because fuck you that's why.

 

 

WHY I WANT HIGH-CAPACITY, MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS by Benedict D. LaRosa April 24, 2013

During testimony at a legislative hearing in Hartford, Connecticut, on January 28, 2013, Neil Heslin, father of a Sandy Hook victim, asked, “I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question: Why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips…. Not one person can answer that question.”

I would like to answer that question.

Because high-capacity, military-style firearms are designed for conflict, and when I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most reliable, durable, combat-proven, highest-capacity weapon available.

Because attempts to infringe my right to own and possess such arms makes me suspicious of the motive.

Because I distrust people in government, as they have consistently proven themselves untrustworthy, attracting people who prefer to rule rather than to govern, to be served rather than to serve.

Because any type of gun control among peaceful people is a violent act which must be resisted.

Because under the Fast & Furious program, this administration has facilitated the transfer of the same type of weapons illegally to Mexican drug dealers, and then used the violence attributed to these weapons as a pretext for more gun control.

Because it makes politicians and bureaucrats nervous and cautious, and I like nervous, cautious public servants.

Because I prefer to have those in government fear me rather than to fear them.

Because banning such weapons from civilian hands concentrates power rather than diffuses it, and concentrated power is dangerous.

Because I refuse to be a subject, and a disarmed or poorly armed populace is no longer sovereign.

Because a populace armed with the latest small arms is a credible threat to tyrannical government.

Because I may have to enforce my rights some day against an invader, criminals, or a tyrannical government.

Because only prisoners and slaves have their needs determined by government, and I’m neither.

Because I operate from rights, not privileges, and my rights are not subject to anyone’s vote.

Because criminals, disturbed people, and would-be tyrants fear us only as long as they need to, and they need to only as long as we are armed with powerful-enough weapons.

Because, since no one may tell me not to publish a book for fear someone may libel another, or not to purchase a car because of possible accidents, then no one can tell me I can’t own a certain type of weapon because it may be misused by someone else.

Because I want a better chance to defend myself, my loved ones, and anyone else I choose from those who would harm us.

Because I’m alarmed that civil agencies of the federal government are stockpiling an unprecedented amount of ammunition, weapons, mine-resistant armored vehicles, and bulletproof traffic-stop booths beyond any legitimate need.

Because, like insurance, it is better to have them and not need them, than to need them and not have them.

Because I alone will determine what weapons are essential for my own defense.

Because banning or registering them is beyond the lawful authority of government.

Because I feel safer possessing them.

Because only fools limit their firepower.

Because of the ever-present potential for lawlessness following riots, as happened in Los Angeles in 1993, and natural disasters, as in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina (2005) and along the New Jersey–New York coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy (2012).

Because they are more dependable than calling 911.

Because government has often proved itself unreliable in an emergency, or dangerous, as at Ruby Ridge in 1992 and Waco in 1993.

Because unless I possess such arms, I am outgunned by Mexican drug smugglers and other gang members armed with the latest weaponry.

Because I don’t know what perils the future will bring.

Because they deter criminal behavior better than anti-gun slogans, laws, signs, or lesser arms.

Because if police need such weapons to defend us, so do we as the first ones at the scene of a crime.

Because I may have to confront more than one heavily armed antagonist over an extended period of time.

Because the servant is not greater than his master, and we didn’t hire the police or politicians to disarm or limit our armaments.

Because bad guys have them and will continue to get them regardless of what laws foolish or treasonous legislators pass.

Because I’m a member of the unorganized militia, and such weapons are appropriate to the militia.

Because they make up better than other weapons for my old age, infirmities, and other limitations.

Because I prefer to speak softly, but carry a big, bad gun with plenty of ammunition.

Because it makes me happy to collect, shoot, and hunt with such weapons, and I have a right to pursue my happiness to the extent of not infringing on the equal rights of others.

Because there are occasional mass shootings that require an in-kind response.

Because, like Theodore Roosevelt, I may not know how to shoot well, but I know how to shoot often.

Because I need to be as well armed as any potential attacker to have a chance at survival.

Because they give me confidence in dangerous situations.

Because such guns make a stronger statement than I can without them.

Because it’s primarily my responsibility to defend myself, my loved ones, and a free government.

Because tyrants, criminals, and ignorant people don’t want me to have them.

Because it’s foolish to get into a fight without more ammunition and a better weapon than your opponent.

Because being stripped of the ability to defend myself adequately doesn’t make me safe; it makes me vulnerable.

Because in some parts of the country, bears, mountain lions, wolves, feral hogs, and other wild animals, some of whom roam in packs, threaten people and domesticated animals, even in residential areas.

Because a few hits may not incapacitate attackers sufficiently to stop them.

Because 75 percent–80 percent of rounds fired by police in lethal-force encounters miss the intended target, and I can expect the same results under the stress of an attack.

Finally, because it’s my God-given right to do so, guaranteed by Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, in which no power is granted to Congress to regulate weapons; and further secured by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits Congress from infringing the right to keep and bear arms, with an equivalent provision in most state constitutions, purchased at a high cost and paid in full by the lives and limbs of countless Americans from 1775 to the present.

[jerry52 893]

Thanks John

[LuPiN8oR 333]

^^that should be on a poster imo.

[dashowdy 141]

it should I would by one, 10 bucks seems fair and have a guide to assault rifles on the back. Half the proceeds can go to sandy hook families.