Orlando presents two distinct political objectives.
First, the most obvious and important to our rulers. Outlawing firearms, most notably “assault weapons” that cosmetically resemble military weapons (but do not function like military weapons used by the state) and, eventually, all firearms with the possible exception of the most rudimentary single shot, bolt and lever action rifles.
The sunset of Bill Clinton’s ban on “assault weapons” and the re-introduction of popular semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15 Bushmaster represent a serious defeat for the state and its effort to disarm America.
The state believes the events that took place in Orlando will turn around public opinion in regard to firearms and more generally turn it against the Second Amendment.
This, however, is doubtful. The “gun culture”—the cultural understanding of the Second Amendment and individual rights—remains strong in America, although liberal propaganda (with its fear of guns) has diluted support to a measurable degree over the last few decades.
A subset of the attack on the Second Amendment is the demonization of people supportive of the Second Amendment, more specifically the patriot community.
Since at least Bill Clinton and Oklahoma City and Waco, the government has engaged in a relentless propaganda war against “militias,” that is to say, people who understand the federal government represents a threat to individual liberty and the founding principles of the republic.
This attack has largely failed despite the propaganda work of the Southern Poverty Law Center and others working in tandem with the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.
It should be noted that the attack on the patriot community is not a partisan effort—demonizing “rightwing extremism” spans the supposed ideological divide (sufficiently demonstrated when the Bush administration initiated the DHS report “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”).
Second, the attack in Orlando will further elevate the federal government’s latest effort to carve out special status and privilege for a preferred group.
The transgender bathroom issue is not merely a “civil rights” campaign, as the progressive media proclaims. It is a cynical effort by the state to add yet another “minority” to its base of support and thus further galvanize liberalism, which represents a highly effective control mechanism. Liberals and progressives inherently depend on the state to enforce their social and political agenda and punish their ideological enemies, usually conservatives (also dependent on the state to enforce their social and political issues).
It can be argued the elite use homosexuality and transgenderism to attack the family, but more immediately sexual politics (including feminism) are used by the state to gain consensus and legitimize violence (for instance, the state has effectively destroyed the anti-war movement in America and a large number of liberals and progressives now support war and organized mass murder under the banner of humanitarian intervention).
Although Obama refuses to single out Islam as the culprit in the Orlando attack—progressives consider Muslims yet another group deserving special government-protected status—the state has consistently exploited Islamic violence (much of it attributable to intelligence agencies and programs) to push the highly profitable war on terror abroad and continue manufacturing a high-tech surveillance and police state at home.
Obama refuses to criticize Islam, and yet he continues the drone war of his predecessor (now largely unopposed by liberals) and military operations, such as the invasion of Libya and, more ominously, a military buildup and provocative activity in tandem with NATO on the Russian frontier. Many if not most liberals accept the post-Cold War rhetoric depicting a supposed Russian threat following the State Department orchestrated coup in Ukraine. Remarkably, many progressives also support the effort to destroy Syria under the convoluted logic of humanitarianism.
In the weeks ahead, it is entirely possible there will be additional Orlando-like events to shore up support for the state and heighten the level of hysteria and paranoia amplified by the establishment media.
Going into the election, the Clinton campaign will dwell on firearms—described as opposing violence, an attribute the state has monopolized—and it will launch fusillade attacks on Donald Trump who has voiced support for the Second Amendment (although largely tangential—in the past he supported a ban on assault weapons).