FREE: JOIN 100,000+ READERS   
≡ Menu
SOVEREIGN MAN

Hugo Chavez: Fighting crime by disarming innocent people

March 6, 2012
Caracas, Venezuela

With an annual murder rate estimated as high as 67 homicides per every 100,000 inhabitants in his country, Hugo Chavez is about to show the world that he’s tough on crime. At least, the non-governmental kind.

Chavez’s government claims that 98% of the homicides in Venezuela involve firearms. His solution? Restrict firearm ownership.

In recent remarks to the Latin American Herald Tribune, Venezuelan Interior and Justice Minister Tareck El Aissami announced that the government will begin suspending firearm importation, effective this month. Furthermore, local gunsmiths will no longer be able to market or sell firearms and ammunition.

According to El Aissami, “As of March, every last gun shop remaining in Venezuela – and there are less than 80 – should be closed. That is to say, in Venezuela, the perverse chapter of the commercialization of firearms and munitions is over.”

That ought to fix the problem. Murderous criminals obviously have no means of acquiring firearms illegally. And hapless victims clearly prefer to defend themselves with soup spoons and Tae Bo lessons.

Apparently Hugo Chavez is simply unwilling to accept having only the 4th highest murder rate in the world. In disarming his people, Chavez is clearly shooting for the top spot and absolutely will not stop until Venezuela surpasses its rivals. Watch out, Ivory Coast, El Salvador, and Honduras!

With a command of typical government logic– borrow your way out of debt, spend your way out of recession, fudge the statistics to fix unemployment– Chavez has now managed to disarm innocent people in order to ‘fight crime.’

This is not the first time Chavez has tried to disarm his people. The stated goal of his 2006 ‘National Weapons Control Plan’ was disarmament and weapons control– reducing the number of weapons, both legal and illegal, in Venezuela.

29 separate programs followed, including bribery, snitching incentives, and new monitoring initiatives. The UN obsequiously applauded the moves.

Then, as now, they said that it’s for the safety and well-being of the people… to protect the population. Just like molesting children at airports, authorizing military detention of citizens, and bathing travelers in radiation.

Needless to say, the political establishment, whether a dictator like Chavez or the ruling kleptocracy up north, doesn’t give a damn about protecting people. They care about protecting themselves, their interests, and the status quo. Curtailing gun sales in the name of ‘fighting crime’ is a means of achieving those goals.

Historically, disarmed populations seldom make too much trouble. Regardless of where you personally stand on firearms, the idea that police and government agents should be the only folks toting weapons ought to sound the alarm bells for any reasonable individual.

It is, perhaps, not entirely coincidental that Chavez is rumored to be suffering from terminal cancer (having just announced another malignancy), and the spectre of revolution is once again rising in Venezuela. If something happens to Chavez, they’re expecting trouble– and taking steps to seize the advantage now.

About the author: Simon Black is an international investor, entrepreneur, permanent traveler, free man, and founder of Sovereign Man. His free daily e-letter and crash course is about using the experiences from his life and travels to help you achieve more freedom.

Want more stuff like this?

Our goal is simple: To help you achieve personal liberty and financial prosperity no matter what happens. Click below to join our community of 100,000+ sovereign individuals.

SIGN ME UP FOR FREE

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Gato da Rua

    Gee, and just yesterday Simon recommended Venezuela as a great place to disappear – Maybe as in “Los desaparecidos”, the ones who just disappear with no trace during South American insurgencies!
    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those
    who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make
    things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they
    serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may
    be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.” – Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764

  • Nick

    Uh … doesn’t this contradict yesterday’s post?

    • YankeeZulu

      You may want to reread it more thoroughly.

  • Don

    That is horribly sad and alarming news for Venezuelans.  As has been proven for hundreds of years, whenever governments disarm their populations, that can be a precursor to governments murdering millions of their population. JPFO and Infowars.com are just two sources of many which have compiled these historical facts and figures, with compilations of over 200,000,000 murdered in the last and current centuries alone — making governments – not civilians – the number one cause of and source of murder – by far.

  • julito

    In the developed world, countries like Switzerland or Finland where guns are allowed have lower firearms death rates than countries like France where it is banned.
    In the US, the most dangerous States are those where the firearms are the most restricted.

    Governments ban guns not to protect the population, but to protect themselves from the population. But the propaganda has been so strong that today most people fully trust their government and give away their right to protect themselves. It’s a sad mad world…

  • RFWAVELENGTH

    History has seen this before. Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, Cuba under Fidel Castro, and present-day China, to name a few. Unarmed people are sheep waiting to be slaughtered. The anti-gun crowd can cry all they want about gun bans being “for the children”; history says otherwise

  • xabier

    Regardless of the effectivity of this meassure, that I basically think it does not address the root of the problem, I would like to remark that Hugo Chavez was elected by majority in open presidential elections with the concurrency of all the political parties and its candidates. Therefore we cannot speak of a ‘dictator’.

Read more:
Tax Slave
US Senate to retroactively punish runaway tax slaves

Close