Monday, January 28, 2013

Kurt Hofmann: Government prepares for war with the people, and mass media approves

Get that? Law enforcement officers "need" to be capable of "killing large numbers of people." What part of maintaining law and order requires mass slaughter?
Kurt Hofmann summarizes the activities of the Julius Streicher wing of the collectivist media complex.
Julius Streicher, Hitler's favorite "journalist," after dancing the executioner's jig at Nuremberg, 1946.

8 comments:

David Forward said...

"Law enforcement officers "need" to be capable of "killing large numbers of people." What part of maintaining law and order requires mass slaughter?"

If it came to a point where the US Government and their "allies" in "civilian law enforcement" (e.g., your local cop shop)declared war on the American people by kicking down doors and shooting anything moving, do the agents doing the bidding of the self-anointed governing elites by kicking and shooting really believe their own families will be immune to such an environment?

The only form of "law enforcement" needing to kill large masses of civilians is the corrupt form enforcing the wet dreams of the authoritarian elites seeking to subjugate the surviving civilian masses.

SWIFT said...

"What part of maintaining law and order requires mass slaughter?" Failure to register your church with the ATF and FBI, from what I learned about Waco.

Anonymous said...

Trinity said...

"Law enforcement officers "need" to be capable of "killing large numbers of people." What part of maintaining law and order requires mass slaughter?"

As long as the LEOs are killing the large numbers of the right people...

Per Dirty Harry Callahan: I don't mind shooting as long as the right people get shot.

And that is the $64,000.00 question, isn't it? How many and in what direction will the muzzles be pointed?

Charles N. Steele said...

This claim that AR-15's are designed for killing large numbers of people as quickly as possible is complete nonsense. Law Enforcement adopted them for almost the opposite reason.

"Since all of the 5.56mm/.223 bullets fired through the interior wall had significantly less penetration than the 9mm, .40 S&W, .45ACP, and 12 ga. shotgun projectiles which were fired through an interior wall, stray 5.56mm/.223 bullets seem to offer a reduced risk of injuring innocent bystanders and an inherent reduced risk of civil litigation ... 5.56mm/.223 caliber weapons may be safer to use in CQB situations and in crowded urban environments than 9mm, .40 S&W, or 12 ga. weapons."

-- Gary Roberts, D.D.S., USNR; Wound Ballistics Review, 3(4):16-28, 1998.

He also notes drawbacks of shotguns compared to 5.56 carbines, including "Poor accuracy and imprecise control over buckshot placement resulting in downrange hazards to innocent bystanders," "Potentially excessive penetration in urban settings," and "Severe recoil," i.e. additional contributor to poor control and accuracy.

LEO's use them because AR's are less likely to "kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible."

I hope Lautenberg, Feinstein, and Co. don't learn this, or they will start insisting LEO's be armed with M-134's and flamethrowers.

Charles N. Steele said...

I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim of Obama's litmus test (skeptical, not dismissive). If true, it should be possible to find officers who said "no" and were dismissed/retired and will say so.

Can anyone provide evidence? Everything I've seen so far seems to trace back to Alex Jones or Jim Garrow, neither of whom I trust. Are any officers saying this is happening?

Anonymous said...

"I'm somewhat skeptical of the claim of Obama's litmus test (skeptical, not dismissive). If true, it should be possible to find officers who said "no" and were dismissed/retired and will say so."

What if they were explicitly told, "you breathe a word of this to ANYONE, and your family dies."??? Now, they could enjoy their pension and retirement and just fade away, or open up and have their family killed. Hmmmm, what are most people going to do?

THAT is the Chicago way.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous at 9:46 AM- I'd bet that SC Justice Roberts and a number of Congress critters could attest to being "explicitly told"...

Charles N. Steele said...

To Anon 9:46

Yeah, right. Every one of these officers who said "no" is a coward.

Give me some evidence, not a "what if" fantasy.