View Single Post
  #33   Report Post  
Old September 29th 11, 03:08 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave,talk.politics.guns,rec.sport.golf,alt.conspiracy
SaPeIsMa SaPeIsMa is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 83
Default Small gun, the serious protection you need ...


"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 28.09.2011 01:29, schrieb John Smith:
.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc. Could stop
'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other guns, or save your
arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and the conspirators want you
silenced!

Civil war in the US would be really terrible. (And I have doubt, that such
handguns would be the weapons of choice.)

Better would be to prevent havoc.

I think, that violence isn't the right way. People would better try to
reacquire control about all elements of the society: the communities,
politics, education, health-care, nutrition, transportation, military and
even entertainment.

In all these fields, there are people involved, that do not want their
country destroyed. But there are also 'bad guys', that like misery,
violence, sickness and dirt.

If you want nicer people, you had to clean your (personal!) environment,
remove the rubble, overpaint the graffiti, disallow drug trafficking,
rethink education, watch less tv, cook your own food, walk, smile - but
don't carry a gun around.


That last one..
"..but don't carry a gun around.."
is where you demonstrate you're not clued in.
The so-called "Wild West" was a much safer place to be than cities on the
East Coast during the same period, and that includes the wild and wooly gold
and silver mining towns in Nevada and California.
And the difference is a simple one.
On the East Coast, the people were disarmed and defenseless
In the "Wild West" people were armed, willing and able to defend
themselves.



To regain control you need to start with local affairs and reorganise,
what is in reach. Do not let any dubious character have any influence on
any public office. To identify such persons is difficult, but some
characteristics you certainly don't want to have at - say - a teacher.
For example membership in any sort of 'secret society' is definitely not
acceptable or massive tattoos, drug consume, sexual disorder, known
violence or extremistic political opinions.


yawn
More ignorant and superficial bigotry.


Such persons are generally a threat to more 'usual' people, because they
are too boring for their sick brains.


What's your excuse ?