People have to remember, Ronald Reagan ran on a Libertarianish platform similar to Ron Paul. Actually fight inflation through stopping the growth in the money supply, Regan favored the gold standard and let Ron Paul chair the commission. He was pro cutting taxes and was pro American sovereignty. Lennon didn't really but, it seems, into party labels. Unfortunately, Mr. CIA Bush hijacked the Reagan presidency and instigated Iran-Contra, etc. Reagan more or less became a teleprompter reader after his assassination attempt. Read about the Hinckley/Bush connection.
One fellow Catcher in the Rye devotee and .38 caliber enthusiast -- and 'guest' of WorldVision -- was alleged (apparent?) Lennon assassin Mark David Chapman.
What in the what now?
How can someone be alleged if after shooting a man, point blank, just sits down calmly and waits to be apprehended?
To say nothing about his rantings and ramblings through the years about why he DID it and even admitted to wanting to take out the other three Beatles.
Was the government out to get John Lennon in the early 1970s? Sure, we know this because of the VERY public immigration battles.
But this is too far flung to suggest Lennon's murder 5 years after his vindication, as he is coming back to the recording studio for the first time in those 5 years, and if a cabal was that all powerful and all knowing, they'd get copies of his recordings and notice that he wasn't the angry political guy that he was back in the early 1970s, was part of an orchestrated plot.
Of course that says nothing about the question "why Lennon?" Honestly, I know how the f*** it sounds and believe me I am NOT advocating anything like this, but I can see assassinations of heads of state or those in political power or people in the social/political landscape getting too big for their britches (MLK, Malcom X) according to lunatic fringes. But an entertainer? And a mellowed and dried out one at that. What would the government be afraid of the 1980 Lennon now that whatever "movement" was going on in the late 1960s and early 1970s had long passed. Oh sure, Lennon would have stood up with the No Nukes brigade, sung at the various Aid concerts (though he'd have some snide remark about the crass, commercialization of it all) and would have stood with the Occupy movement, but what would make anything Lennon said or did different than oh say, The Man In Black, Johnny Cash?
And no, don't tell me to expand my mind on this, there is no way you can convince me that John Lennon was the victim of anything other than a mentally unstable person. You'd have a better shot at convincing me that Paul McCartney really did die in an auto accident in 64 or whenever the hell the Paul Is Dead rumors generally say is the date of Paul's "demise" than John Lennon being the victim of a US Government conspiracy.