Venezuela is a Case Study for What Can Happen to a Disarmed Population
 by Jordan Michaels on December 26, 2018
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/v...ed-population/
Venezuela’s 2012 Disarmament Law banned the private ownership of  firearms, and now, according to a new report, its citizens are beginning  to realize how gun rights could have kept crime and government tyranny  at bay.
“Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a  free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” Javier Vanegas, a  Venezuelan teacher of English now exiled in Ecuador, told 
Fox News.  “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew  they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad,  it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”
Under  then-President Hugo Chavez, the “Control of Arms, Munitions and  Disarmament Law” took effect in 2013 and banned the legal commercial  sale of guns and munitions to all except government entities. Only 37  firearms were voluntarily surrendered, and over 12,500 were confiscated  by force, which represents a small percentage of the 
country’s estimated one to six million firearms.
But  banning law-abiding citizens from firearms ownership has meant that the  only entities with access to guns are criminal organizations, some of  which, known as “colectivos,” act as proxies for government forces to  stamp down pro-democracy opposition.
“They were set up by the  government to act as proxies and exert community control. They’re the  guys on the motorcycles in the poor neighborhoods, who killed any  protesters,” Vanessa Neumann, the Venezuelan-American president and  founder of Asymmetrica, a Washington, D.C.-based political risk research  and consulting firm, told Fox. “The gun reform policy of the government  was about social control. As the citizenry got more desperate and  hungry and angry with the political situation, they did not want them to  be able to defend themselves. It was not about security; it was about a  monopoly on violence and social control.”
Now Venezuelan citizens are beginning to regret surrendering their right to own a firearm.
“Venezuelans  didn’t care enough about it. The idea of having the means to protect  your home was seen as only needed out in the fields. People never would  have believed they needed to defend themselves against the government,”  Vanegas continued. “Venezuelans evolved to always hope that our  government would be non-tyrannical, non-violator of human rights, and  would always have a good enough control of criminality.”
Another  man, Eduardo Espinel, fled the country due to the rising threat of  kidnapping. He told Fox News that “everyone else but the common citizen”  has access to a firearm.
“This law asks for the disarming of the  common people, but everyone else can carry,” Espinel said. “The kind of  law might make sense in a normal country, but in Venezuela, it makes no  sense. People are faced with crime and have no easy means to defend  themselves.”
Maribel Arias, who also fled the country two years ago with her husband and four children, expressed a similar concern.
“The  people of Venezuela should have rights for gun carrying because there  is just too much crime and people should have the right to defend  themselves because the justice system is not working,” Arias asserted.  “If you call the police, the police come only if they want. If they  capture the criminal maybe they will take away whatever they stole, but  they normally go free again. It’s a vicious cycle.”
Venezuela’s  leaders deny the country’s economic collapse, exploding violence, and  human rights violations. Instead, they blame the United States and  opposition leaders for waging an “economic war.”
Chavez took the step to disarm his people in 2013. 
The results of the DPST takeover are clear. 
Bernie and his ilk should go live under Maduro.
He lived his honeymoon in the USSR - the Russian stooge is Bernie - Not Trump!