Larrey Anderson
The world watched in horror as the terrorists prowled and murdered for hours through the streets of a major city in India. The mayhem went all but unabated. No one tried to stop them — because no one could stop them. None of the citizens were armed.

India has a long history of gun control. Under British occupation, the citizens of India had no rights to private gun ownership. Even Mahatma Gandhi protested the firearms prohibition:

“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.”  (M. Gandhi, An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth.)

In 1959 the prohibition was repealed. But the Indian government rushed in to protect its citizens from themselves and by 1990 the government had banned the import of small arms.

Permits for owning weapons are available to the citizenry of India but the licensing process is so complex and bewildering that very few citizens make the effort to (legally) obtain firearms. (A brief history of the gun control laws in India is available here and a video exploring the issue here.)

There is a huge lesson for freedom loving peoples to learn from the massacre in Mumbai: We cannot count on the government to protect us from terrorists who are willing to die to murder us. And without the right to legally own a firearm, we cannot protect ourselves.

American Thinker Blog: Gun Control in India

Tags: guncontrol, india, mumbai, terrorism

0
Comments

Internet Fascism: Australia To Blacklist 10,000 WebsitesWe have all heard of extreme internet censorship in countries such as China, but many of us thought that it would never happen in the western world. After all, who would ever imagine that we would see fascist internet censorship in the “free world”?Well, the reality is that it has happened and it is happening.Australia’s new mandatory internet filter is being prepared to block 10,000 websites as part of a new effort to blacklist websites that contain “unwanted content”.1300 websites have already been identified as objectionable by the Australian Communications and Media Authority and have been placed on the blacklist.So now people in Australia will not be able to go anywhere on the internet that they want to go. Now they will only be able to see the websites that the government allows them to see.Perhaps you don’t live in Australia, and you figure that since it doesn’t affect you that you don’t have anything to worry about. But what you do not understand is that these fascist police state measures always spread like the plague once they have been accepted in one major country in the western world.Already we are seeing major restrictions on internet usage beginning to pop up in the United States and Canada.On November 1st, AT&T, the largest U.S. Internet provider, began testing limits that would curb internet usage for customers whose video and music downloads are flooding their network.Once one or two large internet providers get away with putting a cap on internet use all of the other providers will follow very quickly. Now that Comcast has announced a hard cap on internet use, it is only a matter of time until even more internet providers follow suit.Canada’s new internet subscription model is even more restrictive. What some internet providers in Canada are getting ready to do is to provide internet service on a subscription model similar to how cable television service is provided. In other words, your “package” will include 400 or 500 of the top websites, and if you want more than that you will have to pay for it:http://realitycheck.typepad.com/commentary_news/2008/07/death-of-free-internet-is-imminent–canada-will-be-test-case.htmlThe truth is that there has never been a greater information tool than the internet in the history of the world. The free flow of information that has resulted has given a lot of power to the people of the world. Many governments around the world, including the Western establishment, do not like this at all. Increased censorship and other types of “internet reform” are being introduced in order to curtail our freedom of speech to a more “acceptable” level.Large corporate media does not have a problem with this. Giant media companies are sick and tired of giving away their media for free. Huge newspapers are going broke, movie companies are losing revenue, news organizations have lost control over the flow of information and the “small guy” is finding a way to carve out a bigger piece of the pie. Giant media organizations desperately want their power and control back. Restrictions on the internet will give THEM more control.Most people in modern society are sheep, and they will pay whatever someone tells them to pay, and they will passively accept whatever controls and restrictions are put on them without even a whimper.Internet censorship is here, and most people probably won’t even wake up enough to notice.

Shattered Paradigm: Internet Fascism: Australia To Blacklist 10,000 Websites

0
Comments

You might be wondering about now (Nov 5th 2008) which firearms are going to be banned in the coming months. Today, as civilians, we have the right to bear arms, just about any kind of arms. Tomorrow, as subjects, there will be less choice.

I am asking for everyones help in compiling a list of highly likely candidate firearms which will be the first to be banned from civilian use and or ownership. Assault rifles, tactical sidearms, tactical semi automatic shotguns, high caliber rifles and sidearms and high capacity magazines will be the main categories under the highest threat.

Please comment below and help me compile the list of “Arms You Should Own”. I will update this thread as I follow this topic.

• .50 caliber handguns and rifles

Smith and Wesson Performance Center 500, Barret model 82a1

• Ordinance

5.7 SS19X Ammunition (5.7 SS192 Already Illegal), Green-tip NATO .223, .50

• Any rifle which is semi-automatic, holds anywhere from 10-100 rounds (beta-c mags), of any caliber.

This is going to be a long long long list

0
Comments

Facebook | Iti Adam

i support the 2nd amendment

Tags: firearms

0
Comments