| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Soros Propaganda: Nazi Gun Restrictions Had Little Effect on Hitler Rise to Power
The Truth Behind The News
Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
April 5, 2013
Americans should not be concerned about the Obama administration’s move toward federal gun confiscation because this display, although it is reminiscent of totalitarian dictators of the past, is nothing more than fodder – or at least privately funded propaganda machines would have us all believe.
According to George Soros owned propaganda media, “under Nazi rule, gun laws were actually relaxed. While Jews were banned from owning any weapons, the legal age to own a gun was lowered, while rifle and shotgun possession was deregulated. Experts say gun policy had little effect on Nazi power either way.”
Nearly as ludicrous as this claim is House Representative Diana DeGette, a supporter of the federal ban on high capacity magazines, admitted that she hasn’t a clue how guns work.
DeGette said: “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Juliet Johnson, spokesperson for DeGette said in a statement that “the Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,” Johnson said. “Quite frankly, this is just another example of opponents of common-sense gun violence prevention trying to manipulate the facts to distract from the critical issue of keeping our children safe and keeping killing machines out of the hands of disturbed individuals. It’s more political gamesmanship that stands in the way of responsible solutions.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein blames the National Rifle Association (NRA) for the “fear [that] has set in” in Congress “that if they vote for the bill they won’t be re-elected. It’s that plain, it’s that simple.”
Feinstein is still upset that Senate Majority Leader harry Reid rejected her Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 while placating her on having them voted upon as amendments to current proposed legislation.
In Denver, Colorado, 16 sheriffs held a protest of Obama’s recent visit with local law enforcement and community leaders to discuss Governor John Hickenlooper’s new strict gun control laws.
Justin Smith, sheriff in Larimer County said: “We are here to provide a voice to the millions of honest, law-abiding Coloradans who were ignored by their governor as well as by the majority (Democratic) party at the State House. We watched the president, New York billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the leaders of his party as they’re now throwing their political clout behind continued efforts to pose yet more and more gun control laws on Colorado.”
Smith went on to accuse Obama of using the tragedy at Sandy Hook to propagandize to crowds, law enforcement and elected leaders across the nation and explained that “the problem isn’t that we don’t have enough laws to protect our community. The problem is that the system doesn’t hold criminals accountable for their crimes.”
Beretta, the oldest gun manufacturer in the US, will be leaving Maryland due to strict gun control laws. According to Jeffrey Reh, spokesman for Beretta and acting president of Stoeger Indiustries, the corporation is leaving its hometown because it is “obvious . . . legislation has caused us a serious level of concern within our company.”
Reid is supporting a gun control bill that has the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) concerned as it is a patchwork of other proposed legislation brought forth by Senators Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer.
Although the ACLU does not opposed universal background checks, they believe that the current proposed legislation does not make those checks any more effectual than they currently are.
Chris Calabrese, spokesman for the ACLU pointed out: “However, we also believe those checks have to be conducted in a way that protects privacy and civil liberties. So, in that regard, we think the current legislation, the current proposal on universal background checks raises two significant concerns.”
Calabrese went onto say: “The first is that it treats the records for private purchases very differently than purchases made through licensed sellers. Under existing law, most information regarding an approved purchase is destroyed within 24 hours when a licensed seller does a [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] check now and almost all of it is destroyed within 90 days.”
Data base creation is the end goal, according to Calabrese; as well as “collections of personal information on all of us. That’s not an inevitable result, but we have seen that happen in the past, certainly. As we’ve seen with many large government databases, if you build it, they will come.”
2013-04-18 07:00:46
Source:
