- Government relationship to banks moves from mere oversight to financial interest and partial ownership (Central Govt Control of Finance)
- Government assumes a lead role in managing one of the largest industries remaining in the country, the auto industry, assumes control of the largest car maker in world (until Jan 2009) (Central Govt Control of Industry)
- Government attempt to nationalize health care, "for the people" (Control of Health care)
- Government proposes to nationalize energy sector, under guise of environmental friendly legislation known as Cap and Trade (Central Govt Control of Energy)
- Executive branch replaces balance in governance by appointment of "czars" to oversee various sectors of American life, outside the oversight of the peoples representatives, Congress (Central Govt Control)
- Government seeks to disarm (in violation of Bill of Rights) public under Health reform, by deeming some citizens medically unfit to own firearms, with no clear definition of what that criteria is
- Government leaders brand dissenting opinions as "Un-American", a clear violation of Bill of Rights
I wonder...although its clear i am not alone in these thoughts.
I can testify that this is already happening, I know by personal experience. With deer hunting season fast upon us, in the Southeast, my husband decided it was time for a new rifle (for deer hunting), he found the one he wanted at our local Wal-Mart but was turned away by an associate who informed him that he could not purchase a firearm due to his mental health history.
ReplyDeleteAs keeping with law, Wal-Mart does an FBI background check on all persons desiring to purchase a gun and that is understandable. However, if the buyer checks "yes" to any of the questions on page one (I cannot quote the questions as the associate refused to give us a copy of the form) then said buyer is turned down for the purchase, without ever completing the background check. One of the questions asked is, have you ever been committed to a mental health facility? Reasonable question, I admit. But, if you answer yes, then the background check goes no further, which is absurd in my opinion, because, not all persons committed are "crazy". As is the case with my husband, who, in 2007 suffered a slight breakdown due to job induced stress (his company had just went through a market take-over and the new owners (foreign) were inacting change faster than the employees could grasp). My husband did not commit himself but rather was forced into the facility by the powers that be, on the grounds of his mental state, though mind you, he was fully functional on his job.
We're now locked in and labeled by this...my husband may never be allowed to purchase another firearm, thus your statement rings true..."deeming some citizens medically unfit to own firearms".
We are fighting for his right to bear arms but who knows if we'll win.
BTW...have you read Dick Morris's book CATASTROPHE? If not, I strongly recomend it to you.
ReplyDelete...very good post, keep em coming honey.
I don't think it is a provocative thing to say if you are saying it to someone who pays attention to what is happening, and knows even the most basic facts about the founding principles of this country.
ReplyDeleteisabella sorry to hear about your husband's troubles. Here in Montana we have a new law that says the federal government cannot interfere with firearms sales when the guns are produced in the state. There is plenty of good deer hunting here, so come on over! Would like to see the situation improve where you are, too.