The Real Reason Behind Gun Control

[rodder]

Interesting article I found while doing some surfing for ruby ridge/waco info.
I searched here and didn't find it but please excuse if this is a repost.

http://www.constitution.org/col/san940127.htm

Alternative Politics, SA News, Jan 27 - Feb 10, 1994
Next Wave
by Benedict D. LaRosa
The Real Reason Behind Gun Control

With public attention riveted on the murder/conspiracy trial of the Branch Davidians, little attention has been paid to the Treasury Department's investigation of the conduct of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF). Most of the media quickly saw through the veneer of objectivity and rightly ignored the report released last September. However, as with most government documents, there is some truth hidden among the chaff. Appendix G of the report is a brief history of federal firearms enforcement. It is startling in its candor in revealing the real reason behind the gun control movement in this country.

Gun control is being sold to the American people as a crime fighting measure. (There are also attempts to make it an environmental and health issue.) Sarah Brady has publicly admitted that the Brady Bill — signed into law last November 30 — will have little effect on crime. But, she added, it was a necessary first step. President Clinton warned, "This is the first step. There is more to be done. We cannot stop here." To what are Sarah Brady and President Clinton referring? Appendix G provides the answer.

The report admits that the BATF raided the Branch Davidian community at Mt. Carmel to enforce contemporary gun control laws. It adds:

In a larger sense, however, the raid fit [sic] within an historic, well-established and well-defended government interest in prohibiting and breaking up all organized groups that sought to arm or fortify themselves.... From its earliest formation, the federal government has actively suppressed any effort by disgruntled or rebellious citizens to coalesce into an armed group, however small the group, petty its complaint, or grandiose its ambition.

Appendix G relates how the experience of Shay's Rebellion (1786-87), the Whiskey Rebellion (1794), Fries Rebellion (1799), the fugitive slave rescues of the 1850s, John Brown's raid on the Harper's Ferry federal arsenal (1859), the Civil War, Southern resistance to Reconstruction, the Pullman Strike (1894), etc., created an intolerance to organized, armed groups on the part of the federal government. This paranoia led Congress to pass the National Firearms Act of 1934, not "to curb the gangsters' ability to arm themselves" with automatic weapons and sawed-off shotguns as advertised, but "to discourage ownership of such weapons without outlawing them." It admits that "No self-respecting gangster would want to register, much less pay the tax, on his Tommygun." It goes on to say:

The passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, the first federal effort to control ownership of firearms, grew out of this historic fear of armed organizations.... In recent times, the federal government has shown itself even less patient with armed groups.... As both history and recent events clearly show, the United States has never tolerated armed groups residing within its borders. The intent of the particular organization, whether ideological or criminal, mattered little.... ATF's enforcement focus retains the flavor of that historic concern with armed organizations.

The Branch Davidians were not criminals and cults are not illegal. It was not criminal activity that brought the Branch Davidians to the attention of the federal government, but the fact that they were an organized, armed group dissatisfied with the status quo. Government agents created the impression of illegality to justify their suppression of the Davidians and to dissuade similar dissenters. This is why Attorney General Janet Reno warned that "more Waco-like standoffs will occur in the near future. I hope an example has been set ... to discourage those who are tempted to join cults." The Brady Bill and the even more draconian gun control measures in the upcoming crime bill are but the latest steps dating back to colonial times to disarm the American people, not criminals, in defiance of the Second Amendment.

Note: When Jon Roland read the above article, he said to himself, "What this country needs is more armed groups."

[stephpd]

Probably why around the same time the word 'militia' became a bad word. MSM did it's best to portray any group that assumed that name as a bunch of Neo Nazis, skinhead, Aryan nation types. And that same idea of almost every group that claims an interest in firearms today is labeled 'right wing radicals'. The words may change over time but the ideas of these control freaks hasn't.

I'd really like to see a copy of that ATF report. I'll try searching and see if I can find it. Maybe others here with better skills could help.

[Roland of Gilead]

This looks like the whole thing.

http://www.carolmoore.net/waco/waco-...y-report1.html

Haven't plowed through it yet, but should be interesting. Thanks to the OP.

[General Geoff]

Of course the feds are afraid of organized, armed groups of citizens. There's over 300 armed private citizens for every law enforcement officer in the nation (and that's a conservative estimate). The sheer power of We The People is unfathomable; were any small portion of us to become truly organized, not even the full might of the United States Military could stop us.

They should be afraid.

[tes151]

What if, say, 200-300 of us got together and formed an armed group, and called ourselves a progressive study group. I wonder what the MSM would come up with to call us so they could make us sound evil?

[stephpd]

What if, say, 200-300 of us got together and formed an armed group, and called ourselves a progressive study group. I wonder what the MSM would come up with to call us so they could make us sound evil?

Or join all the anti gun groups and hope that gets the governments attention. Act like cancer and corrode these groups from within and hope that they round up the leaders when they come for us.

[beefcakeb0]

Or join all the anti gun groups and hope that gets the governments attention. Act like cancer and corrode these groups from within and hope that they round up the leaders when they come for us.

now thats a great idea. it seems like to me they may be :tinfoilhat: doing the same things to tighten up laws on us

[rodder]

Of course the feds are afraid of organized, armed groups of citizens. There's over 300 armed private citizens for every law enforcement officer in the nation (and that's a conservative estimate). The sheer power of We The People is unfathomable; were any small portion of us to become truly organized, not even the full might of the United States Military could stop us.

They should be afraid.

If the forum would let me use more than one line of text for a signature I might just have to put that in there.

I hear all the time (often on this forum) that if there were ever an actual armed resistance by The People we'd get stomped in a hurry. Considering what a handful of assholes with AKs can do to our guys in the ME, it is indeed unfathomable what even a tiny percentage of the population could do as a truly organized and purposeful group.

[camper]

Just like any gang or criminal orginzation, the man at the top will eliminate any dissenters quickly so as not to lose the control they have grown to love.

No reason other than that.

camper

[ungawa]

What if, say, 200-300 of us got together and formed an armed group, and called ourselves a progressive study group. I wonder what the MSM would come up with to call us so they could make us sound evil?

Racist. Haven't you been paying attention?