San Bernardino Shooting, Yet Another Recent Example of the Failure of Gun Control

Ok, 14 Americans are dead, 16 injured. Immediately, Obama pushes for more gun control but urges prudence on labeling this a terrorist act or identifying Islamic terrorist connections. Why so careful about the connection to so-called radical Islam but so quick to jump on the gun control bandwagon?

It should be transparent by now that Obama, the closet Marxist, favors gun control over acts of terror since he uses every single case of a shooting to highlight the need for more gun control. Permit me to speculate here but one of the best ways to impose tyranny is to disarm the population. Marxism and the New World Order require both, i.e, a disarmed population and tyranny.

In front of the UN building in NYC. The UN's stance on gun control anyone?
In front of the UN building in NYC. Notice the Chosen Weapon- A Non-Military Handgun

Paris- The Failure of Gun Control

Paris has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world. Heck even the police cannot carry weapons in Paris. How did that work out for the people killed over there? Seven shooters killed or injured over 500 people in about 30 minutes (an average of 70 per shooter). Since there was no opposition, they calmly reloaded 3 or 4 times killing people lying on the floor of the movie theater venue for example with no resistance in sight. I wonder how that would have played out in an armed population?

Why is it that the sites chosen are invariably “gun free” zones? The Batman shooter- a gun free theater. Virginia Tech shooting– gun free campus. Texas army base shooting- gun free military base. (Yes, the soldiers are not permitted to carry on the base.) Anyone seeing a pattern here?

Yet Another Failure, San Bernardino

Once again, the failure of gun control raises its ugly head. The media of course ignore it but the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, the site of the recent massacre of innocents by a husband and wife, is another gun-free zone. This is never really highlighted by the media however. Instead, Obama’s gun control comments take precedence.

Why does the media choose to ignore the obvious fact that this shooting was conducted in a “gun-free” zone? We know they hardly mention or completely ignore the connection between mass shootings and psychotropic drugs over the past 20 years. Instead the focus is on the weapon used, not the connection between drugs and gun free zones.

It may be easy to make the connection between advertiser revenues and drugs. According to the National Institute for Health Care Management (NIHCM Foundation) in their year 2000 study (the latest they have on the issue on their site):

  • Prescription drugs advertised directly to consumers are now the largest and fastest selling medicines increasing 19% 1999.
  • Just 25 top-selling medicines promoted directly to consumers accounted for 40.7% — or $7.2 billion — of the overall $17.7 billion increase in retail drug spending in 1999.
  • The same 25 top-selling drugs had an aggregate one-year sales growth in 1999 of 43.2%. The growth in sales for all other drugs was 13.3 %.
  • Doctors wrote 34.2% more prescriptions in 1999 than in 1998 for the 25 DTC- promoted drugs that contributed most to overall drug spending.
  • Doctors wrote only 5.1% more prescriptions for all other prescription drugs.
  • The top 25 most heavily advertised drugs in 1999 accounted for 77% of all mass media advertising dollars for prescription drugs.

I think its safe to conclude that the media will not bite the hand that feeds it. We all can observe that since this study was done, ads on TV from Big Pharma have increased significantly. The connection between gun free zones and shootings or the gun control vs. no gun control issue is obviously less transparent.

What is the Connection Between the Media Reporting and Gun Control?

As pointed out on the home page, there is a massive monopolization of the media by Corporations. So it stands to reason that if you work for them and wish to remain employed, the spin you choose to apply will be that approved by those who pay you, the owners or controllers of the media.

Navy_Global_Force
How Is It “America’s Navy” If It Serving Under NATO, a UN Agency? Who Pays the Debt Incurred BTW?

Do the owners have an agenda then? Of course, they do. One doesn’t have to do a great deal of tedious research to determine their agenda of globalization. It is now accepted as fact that it is necessary for the United States to be fighting wars on foreign soils for decades now on the other side of the planet. As noted before in this blog, the Navy was running commercials ending with the catch phrase, Navy, A Global Force for Good. The assumption being that we are the policeman of the planet generating more debt for our citizens serving global needs.

Who pays the debt incurred? Who benefits the most from the debt? Who benefits the least? How is it “America’s Navy” if it is serving under NATO and the UN.? Do the nations served inherit any of the debt generated for the services of our Navy? Do our citizens get to choose any of the missions whose debt we inherit? How then is it “America’s Navy”? American’s don’t choose where to send it do they?

So just what is the connection between media reporting and gun control? Honest answers to the above questions lead us away from what the media would have us assume. Our military is being used by the UN under NATO to fight foreign wars etc. yet the UN is pushing for global gun control emphasizing control of weapons used for civilian protection. Meanwhile, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council are the 5 largest arms dealers in the world. Anyone talking about controlling the military?

Additionally, one world government can only be enforced under a tyrannical reign as in Communist run countries where authority controls the people under the tyranny of a police state. There is a human cost for disarmament. A good read on this issue is Death by Gun Control by Aaron Zelman and Richard W. Stevens. Curiously however, it is now out of print and the prices are jacked up on Amazon. Always seems to happen to books that pull away that curtain from the wizard it seems. I wonder why?

May I suggest that gun control is not really aimed at control of the gun but rather control of the people. As noted in the book above, Death by Gun Control, all genocides are proceeded by gun control or citizen disarmament as in Nazi Germany, Rwanda, China, Cambodia, Russia and others.

Tags: , ,
Previous Post

So What Do You Do With This Information Anyway?- Part One

Next Post

Professors Say Elf on the Shelf Bad for Kids, But Let’s Dig a Little Deeper

Leave a Reply