Who Does the U.S.Government Owe? National Debt?

Looking at who the government owes may seem like a huge list, but lets start at the root of it.

We the People Started Paying in a Tax to Social Security and back when it started it was only .5% and if the government had left it alone all this time there would be no need to increase it and there would be enough money to cover those that pay into it. THOSE WHO PAID INTO IT. I think you know where I'm heading with this. The US Government has been spending our hard earned money for years. So I say to you this.... The U.S. Government owes the Social Security Fund More money than any other country it has borrowed from.  So politics aside, the Government needs to quick sending our money out of the country and start putting it back where it belongs. Feed your family before you feed your neighbors!!!

but, but what about all the money we owe China... "What about it" we can still owe it to them after we pay ourselves back. Lets start taking care of our own.

How about a New SPENDING CONTROLl Bill?

I have recently an heard argument from an older female American citizen that is for gun control. Her Argument was that guns don't need magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. When I explained to her that the manufacturer wasn't were you get these magazines, but from aftermarket distributors it was then a well there is no need for assault rifles... Which would take us into the ...well there is no need for candy or gum or porn or movies, etc. Then She went on to say that without governmental gun control that China would just come and take us over. And I thought to myself, Other countries have no interest in invading a country where there are 5 guns to each household. Much easier to invade those countries without guns, besides the fact that China already owns us. We are but a mere retail outlet store for them but that is for an entirely new post.

 As I sat there thinking about the time and effort the Government and or media has put into detracting us with this old issue. The 2nd Amendment is still there to protect the rights of all citizens. Instead we the people should be focusing on a more important issue, Government Spending!

When I run out of money, I stop spending until I get more, not go tax more so I can spend more. Eventually there is no more to take. I am all for sharing when I have excess and my children aren't hungry. But when I haven't enough to feed my own family I sure as hell am not going to steal from my own household to share with my neighbor. Our current Government takes form its own and sends it abroad when it should be taking care of its own. Besides, when did public appointed figures become celebrities with no accountability for their actions?

Google tells FBI to suck it!

“The FBI has the authority to prohibit companies from talking about these requests,” reads a blog post about the new numbers on Google’s public policy blog. “But we’ve been trying to find a way to provide more information about the NSLs we get—particularly as people have voiced concerns about the increase in their use since 9/11. Starting today, we’re now including data about NSLs in our Transparency Report. We’re thankful to U.S. government officials for working with us to provide greater insight into the use of NSLs.”

NSLs have come under fire not just for their secrecy, but for their lack of judicial review; They require far less oversight than a search warrant or even a subpoena, can be issued by any FBI field office, and have been applied much more widely in the post-9/11 era. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has called NSLs “one of the most frightening and invasive…of all the dangerous government surveillance powers that were expanded by the USA PATRIOT Act.”

Google specifies in an FAQ included with its report on NSLs that the letters can only legally seek “the name, address, length of service, and local and long distance toll billing records” of a Google user. Those outmoded legal terms mean that the FBI shouldn’t be able to get actual content data such as Gmail messages or private YouTube videos. Perhaps surprisingly, even IP addresses are off limits, Google says.

 Read Google’s full blog post here.

157 Specific Firearms Ban, Whats the point?

A bill introduced last month by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. would ban 157 specific firearms designed for military and law enforcement use and exempt others made for hunting purposes. It also would ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. (Eileen Sullivan)

 "There's no logic to it," said Greg Danas, president of a Massachusetts-based expert witness business and firearms ballistic laboratory. "What kind of effect is it going to have?"

If you ban any specific gun you will achieve :
1) Less jobs for those Americans that are making them
2) Law Enforcement and Government that have more Power(CONTROL) over its law abiding Citizens
3) Raise the price of pre-banned weapons on the black market
4) Give the media something to report on instead of Government OVER Spending
5) Criminals will still commit crimes, killers will still kill and law abiding Citizens will continue to have the Government take away their Constitutional Rights.
6) It would give politicians a chance to say "Lookie at what I did"

Its already illegal to kill people, HELLO!

Why Disarm Law-Abiding Citizens?

Amazingly enough our Government has finally gotten around to realizing the it is already spent wasted time on this issue. So they are trying to fix gun violence with deeper background checks on law-abiding citizens. Criminals are already getting their hands on guns without this effort. And in some cases they are getting the guns from the so called "Government Sting Operations".

More laws do not keep law breakers from committing crime. Even a 6 year old knows that, yet our government still pursues this course. The greatest question should be WHY? The only feasible answer is purely CONTROL. They will never have control over law breakers, but they can use these opportunities to take greater control over the ones that do abide by the law.  IF WE LET THEM.

I agree it is a tough idea to stand up to a government that just walks in and takes over Countries but it has to start somewhere. Without our Constitutional Rights this Country is no longer FREE and will need to be liberated by the Dictators in office. We can only hope that when it comes down to it that our own military soldiers Stand firm when it comes to defending Constitutional Rights.

I do not believe it is right for any law abiding citizen to work hard and save money to buy a gun legally only to have it taken away from a government that only seeks to disarm its people.

Does Obama Administration want to disarm the people only to make it easier for this country to be invaded by another Country?  Only they know the answer to that one. With higher Taxes and more Gun Control the people will no longer have anything left to defend the untapped oil supplies of this country. I guess the Obama Administration is holding off drilling so that whom ever invades our country will have a reason to do so after they make it nice an easy on them by disarming the Nations Second Largest Army.... its Armed Citizens.