“Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said he will expand the number of civilians involved in armed militias,” foxnews.com reports, “providing guns to as many as 400,000 loyalists. The announcement came as Maduro’s opponents are gearing up for the largest rally yet to press for elections and a host of other demands.” What could possibly go wrong? A little background . . .

The Bolivarian militias, currently at approximately 100,000, were created by the late Hugo Chavez to assist the armed forces in the defense of his revolution from external and domestic attacks.

Speaking to thousands of militia members dressed in beige uniforms gathered in front of the presidential palace, Maduro said that vision remains relevant as Venezuela continues to face “imperialist aggression.”

“A gun for every militiaman!” he cried.

See how that works?

If the prefatory clause of America’s Second Amendment — “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” — meant that only government approved militia members had the “right to keep and bear arms,” it would only be a matter of time that we’d be Venezuela.

Which has banned civilian firearms ownership, confiscated civilian firearms and tooled-up to counter “imperialist aggression.” Not so coincidentally, it’s also a country where human rights have taken a powder. Like this [via hrw.org]:

Under the leadership of President Hugo Chávez and President Nicolás Maduro, the accumulation of power in the executive branch and erosion of human rights guarantees have enabled the government to intimidate, censor, and punish its critics.

Severe shortages of medicines, medical supplies, and food have intensified since 2014, and weak government responses have undermined Venezuelans’ rights to health and food. Security forces have arbitrarily detained and tortured protesters, and raids in low-income communities have led to widespread allegations of abuse.

Other persistent concerns include poor prison conditions and impunity for human rights abuses.

And now full scale armed repression by the Presidents’ “militia”? Count on it.

Recommended For You

27 Responses to Venezuelan Prez Arms Friends, Not Foes: This Is What Happens to a Selectively Armed Populace

  1. Sliding down the Commie rathole. And Venezuela used to be a nice country; well, what passes in South America for a nice country.

    What is it about that cursed continent?

    • Low IQ people out number the higher IQ people, factor in catholic , Marxism, and the nature of disgenics, its just a cycle of failure.

      But hey, “We are all equal, no group is better, smarter, more protective then any other group”. “all choices/points of view are equal and any facts that prove this lie to be a lie must be “RACIST” and therefore not true because MUH FEELS”.

  2. “A gun for every militiaman!” – What just one?!? Guess that’s why communism sucks and capitalism rules.

    • Well, that’s just the slogan. Among communist countries, it’s not unheard of to follow the “a gun for every other man” rule. Notice he made no mention of ammunition.

  3. So-called “disarmament” is always selective armament. The question is not whether to have guns or not, but rather who shall have them and who shall not, who can be trusted to rule and who must be ruled over by their betters.

    • Because you can never have total disarmament: the state gets its legitimacy from its use of force. The question always is:
      Who do you trust to be armed? Even anti-gun China arms its police with everything from AKs to RPGs and mortars (no kidding on the big weapons which have very limited use in arrests)

        • “You’re under arrest!”
          “Sir, that’s a boot with a foot still in it.”
          “Shut up, Private! And go get a mop.”

  4. This is essentially the same model used in North Korea: The Commie/Socialist economy goes to hell and the Supreme Leader blames capitalists and outside influences.

    The government recruits into the militia by promising that in the militia you will have a warm bed, plenty to eat, nice clothes to wear, a government provided gun, and all the girls will fall at your feet, if they know what’s good for them.

    So long as you remain in good standing in the militia, that is you do whatever your Supreme Leader and his officers require, you will continue to get these perks and your entire family will not be put in a rat-infested prison with sadistic pedophile guards in charge of the wing where you little sister is kept.

  5. No. You are dead wrong. *THIS* is what happens to a *disarmed* populace. *THIS* is the reason we have the 2nd Amendment. Anyone who wants to limit your 2A rights wants *THIS* exact situation as should be treated as the traitorous bastards they are. As a poster said above, you can guaran-damn-tee that a genocide/democide is not far behind.

  6. It’s about to get fucking real down there. Something really big will happen in a major city and there will be thousands dead. The media controlled by Maduro will white wash it as a minor event but the message will be sent to the rest that they are all prisoners now.
    Notice how the gun control came first, then a period of time , now arming their supporters with guns and food.

  7. “…meant that only government approved militia members had the “right to keep and bear arms,” it would only be a matter of time that we’d be Venezuela.”

    According to all the smartest people (that would be the progressive left), this would never happen in the ‘civilized world’. And who am I to disagree with them? They’ve labelled me a knuckle-dragging, in-bred, toothless, savage with juvenile fantasy-fulfillment issues, after all.

    /sarc 😉

  8. “If the prefatory clause of America’s Second Amendment — “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” — meant that only government approved militia members had the “right to keep and bear arms,” it would only be a matter of time that we’d be Venezuela.”

    To the folks who appeal to that clause, that would be a feature, not a bug.

    A “militia” is the people, armed in their own interest, without supervision or permission of “the government.” This whole idea of free citizens organizing to govern themselves (for their own advantage) just keeps baffling some folks, it seems. Once “the government” is aligned against “the people” it’s not a republic any more.

    The Nazi & Soviet “auxiliaries” having faded into history, as Venezuela descends further we’ll at least have a more recent example of how this plays out, to point to. I wouldn’t with what’s coming on them even for that.

  9. Ah, the same model as the original “states’ right” interpretation of the Second Amendment: those part of the elite who consider themselves better (in the U.S., that meant wealthy landowners and former slave owners) get to be the militia, and anyone of whom they don’t approve (in the U.S., that was blacks) is just cattle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *